Commit
This commit does not belong to any branch on this repository, and may belong to a fork outside of the repository.
debug/gdb: Add comments for untrivial flags.
The necessity of --without-libexpat-prefix is not obvious and needs comments. Signed-off-by: Kirill K. Smirnov <kirill.k.smirnov@gmail.com>
- Loading branch information
1 parent
5fd69f7
commit f64f561
Showing
1 changed file
with
14 additions
and
0 deletions.
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
f64f561
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'd still mention why --with-libexpat-prefix= does not work - old comment explained how that breaks static builds - we've already had that done once.
Other than that, thanks for the explanation. I am still a bit surprised that it looks at$prefix/lib rather than at $ {CT_SYSROOT_DIR}$prefix/lib - after all, we do pass ${CT_SYSROOT_DIR} as the build sysroot. Having seen gdb's configure stupidity at using libexpat prefix, however, I could dismiss the possibility that gdb's configure is buggy though.
So, am I right that the test case is to place a bogus libexpat.so into host's /usr/lib?
f64f561
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
(I might have a look at gdb's configure later - I want to know what test case was manifesting this bug)