Note: This is a public test instance of Red Hat Bugzilla. The data contained within is a snapshot of the live data so any changes you make will not be reflected in the production Bugzilla. Email is disabled so feel free to test any aspect of the site that you want. File any problems you find or give feedback at bugzilla.redhat.com.
Bug 205976 - Missing gdb.ppc64 build (while gdb.ppc exists)
Summary: Missing gdb.ppc64 build (while gdb.ppc exists)
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED RAWHIDE
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: distribution
Version: rawhide
Hardware: ppc64
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Bill Nottingham
QA Contact: Bill Nottingham
URL:
Whiteboard:
: 168157 205333 (view as bug list)
Depends On: 205235
Blocks: 205333 206488
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2006-09-11 03:53 UTC by Jan Kratochvil
Modified: 2014-03-17 03:02 UTC (History)
6 users (show)

Fixed In Version: gdb-6.5-8.fc6.ppc64
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2006-09-30 09:05:01 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:

Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Jan Kratochvil 2006-09-11 03:53:09 UTC 
Description of problem:
gdb.ppc64 is missing in RawHide.ppc composition (Bug 205333).

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
gdb-6.5-7.fc6.ppc.rpm

How reproducible:
Always.

Steps to Reproduce:
1. List
http://armstrong.rhts.boston.redhat.com/distros/rawhide-ppc/Fedora/RPMS/gdb-6.5-7.fc6.ppc64.rpm

Actual results:
No file found.

Expected results:
File should be found.

Additional info:
Comment 1 Jesse Keating 2006-09-11 11:51:27 UTC 
As stated in the bug blocked by this, we can't really include this as multilib
as the ppc and ppc64 versions conflict with eachother.  In i386 / x86_64 land
this isn't a problem so much as each arch gets their own gdb.  But since we only
ship one ppc tree that is both ppc and ppc64 we can't do that here.
Comment 2 Jan Kratochvil 2006-09-11 12:08:14 UTC 
As I consider gdb.ppc64 as essential component of RHEL.ppc64 it should be
resolved somehow. What to choose?

(1) You will handle conflicting "application-multilibs" as some new feature
    of anaconda/yum till FC6-GA.

(2) I should provide specific ppc64-conditional packaging in .spec to make
    gdb-6.5-X.ppc.rpm and gdb-6.5-X.ppc64.rpm non-conflicting
    (separate /usr/bin/gdb64 binary etc.).

(3) I should provide specific ppc64-conditional packaging in .spec to make
    gdb-6.5-X.ppc.rpm and gdb64-6.5-X.ppc64.rpm non-conflicting
    (separate /usr/bin/gdb64 binary etc.).
    Not sure if it gets installed by anaconda/yum appropriately, I hope so.
Comment 3 Jesse Keating 2006-09-11 12:16:30 UTC 
How is it that gcc handles this?  Of course a better answer would be to stop
trying to do silly things by offering only one ppc variant, but I don't think we
can do that.  In RHEL5 land, the ppc tree may be from a standpoint of we support
only ppc64 machines, but 32 bit runs faster, so we could provide only the 64bit
gdb.  Can a ppc64 gdb debug 32bit applications?
Comment 4 Bill Nottingham 2006-09-11 14:35:05 UTC 
Yes, AFAIK.

How do they conflict? If it's just /usr/bin/gdb, that should be handled fine by
the normal elf32/elf64 handling.
Comment 5 wzhou 2006-09-11 15:38:44 UTC 
(In reply to comment #3)

> Can a ppc64 gdb debug 32bit applications?

Yes. ppc64 gdb can debug 32bit and 64bit application at the same time.  Both 
RHEL4 and FC5 for ppc/ppc64 shipped a 64bit gdb, which can debug both 32-bit 
and 64bit application.  I am not sure how these distribution build (and ship) 
it though.
Comment 6 Jesse Keating 2006-09-11 15:46:14 UTC 
I'm going to add gdb back to the "whitelist" of multilib packages.  Normal
handling should make this work.
Comment 7 Jan Kratochvil 2006-09-11 16:15:04 UTC 
(In reply to comment #6)
> I'm going to add gdb back to the "whitelist" of multilib packages.  Normal
> handling should make this work.

OK, understood it is in fact enough.
Comment 8 Jan Kratochvil 2006-09-13 12:31:00 UTC 
(In reply to comment #6)
> I'm going to add gdb back to the "whitelist" of multilib packages.

http://armstrong.rhts.boston.redhat.com/distros/rawhide-ppc/Fedora/RPMS/
with timestamps "13-Sep-2006 05:34" still does not contain "gdb-*.ppc64.rpm".
Should I wait more or it just still has not been done?
Comment 9 Jan Kratochvil 2006-09-30 08:48:22 UTC 
*** Bug 168157 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 10 Jan Kratochvil 2006-09-30 08:49:36 UTC 
*** Bug 205333 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 11 Jan Kratochvil 2006-09-30 09:05:01 UTC 
Exists and it can debug itself:
http://armstrong.rhts.boston.redhat.com/distros/rawhide-ppc/Fedora/RPMS/gdb-6.5-8.fc6.ppc64.rpm
/usr/bin/gdb: ELF 64-bit MSB executable, cisco 7500, version 1 (SYSV), for
GNU/Linux 2.6.9, dynamically linked (uses shared libs), for GNU/Linux 2.6.9,
stripped
Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.