Almost done

[Phil Torre]

On Thu, Aug 18, 2005 at 07:38:37PM +0300, leonp at plris.com wrote:
> On Thursday, 18 ??August 2005 19:32, Phil Torre wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 18, 2005 at 07:25:50AM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2005-08-17 at 10:25 -0700, Phil Torre wrote:
> > > > I found a post on some gcc mailing list which claimed that there
were
> > > > known problems with C++ support and this particular combination of
> > > > gdb and gcc version.
> > >
> > > True. Wrt. debugging C++ the old rule of thumb "use the latest tools"
> > > applies. GDB 5.2 definitely is way too old (current is gdb-6.3!!!) for
> > > debugging C++ having been generated by modern GCCs.
> >
> > Full agreement.  Sadly, I've got this ball and chain of a BDM patch to
> > drag along with me, so I can't progress to GDB 6.x until I figure out
> > how to apply the BDM support.
> >
> > -Phil
> I have the following gdb:
> 
> GNU gdb 6.1.1
> Copyright 2004 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
> GDB is free software, covered by the GNU General Public License, and you
are
> welcome to change it and/or distribute copies of it under certain
conditions.
> Type "show copying" to see the conditions.
> There is absolutely no warranty for GDB.  Type "show warranty" for
details.
> This GDB was configured as "--host=x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu 
> --target=powerpc-rtems".
> 
> Let me know immediately (I go home in 2-3 mins) if you want me to send it
to 
> you.

Leon,

Does your gdb-6.1.1 have bdm-4-gdb (also known as mpcbdm) applied?  If so,
I'd
be grateful for your source code.  I don't even know for sure what is
involved
in moving mpcbdm over to gdb-6.x, but it didn't move from 4.x to 5.x without
some massaging, so I assumed it wouldn't just be a drop-in.

-Phil