Re: VAX Ultrix? (Re: GDB dropping support for mips-irix and alpha-tru64)
Pedro Alves <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.gdb.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On 10/13/2014 05:03 PM, Mark Kettenis wrote: >> Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2014 06:38:09 -0700 >> From: Joel Brobecker <[email protected]> >> >>> Going over the supported hosts in configure.host, I noticed we still >>> "support" VAX Ultrix / 4.2BSD: >>> >>> vax-*-bsd*) gdb_host=vax ;; >>> vax-*-ultrix*) gdb_host=vax ;; >>> >>> Does it make sense to keep support for old Ultrix given we're >>> dropping OSF/1 / Tru64? >> >> Wikipedia says that VAX production ceased in 2005. The last VAX-specific >> patch I can see being submitted to gdb-patches is us mentioning support >> for VAX floats in the Ada mode (which we removed in 2010). VAX VMS was >> removed in 2010 from BFD. There seems to be some regular activity around >> VAX on the GCC side, though, but Ultrix itself seems to be no longer be >> supported. > > There are probably quite a few VAXen still running. Just learned last > week there are still some radiotelescopes around running a VAX to > control the telescope. But they're probably running VMS on those > though. If you want, there's the SIMH simulator. > >> So this seems to indicate that we will be able to remove support >> for Ultrix. > > FWIW, I kept the VAX Ultrix and VAX 4.2BSD code around as an example > of how a classic ptrace(2) implementation works. Helped me a great > bit when refactoring inf-ptrace.c back in the days. Linux really > turned ptrace(2) into a mess... For my own education, which code are you referring to though? The PT_READ_U / PT_WRITE_U bits in inf-ptrace.c? > > Other than the educational value, there is no point in keeping Ultrix > and BSD4.2 support alive. I'm pretty sure that GDB has become too > bloated to compile and/or run on these systems. > >>> Below's the table I was building, listing the full set of >>> supported hosts, according to configure.host, mapping OS to triplet. >> >>> | HP-UX | hppa*-*-hpux* | >>> | HP-UX | ia64-*-hpux* | >> >> I suspect that HP-UX will no longer find any takers. AdaCore had to >> step-up many many years go to keep those alive. The situation is >> different today, and we are stepping down. > > It'd be somewhat sad to see inf-ttrace.c go. IMHO ttrace(2) is by far > the best example of how to do a proper threads-aware debugger interface. Yeah, I agree here. Thanks, Pedro Alves