No libgdb.a found
lazarus / 62-General

----------------------------------------------------------------------
jiaxing2 · 2020-05-16 07:14

Code: [Select]No libgdb.a found, supply NOGDB=1 to disable debugger
support.
On Debian Unstable (and Testing, too), there is no libgdb-dev package.

There is no other package that provide this libgdb.a, too.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cyrax · 2020-05-16 07:19

Just ignore that error message, unless you are using the textmode
editor (FP).

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thaddy · 2020-05-16 07:23

Yes, you can ignore it or explicitly supply GDBMI=1 for building 3.0.4
when you build FPC which is the default for 3.2.0 and trunk anyway.
(and you have the reverse option NOGDBMI=1 for those)
That way FPC will use the MI interface from gdb and does not look to
try to link to libgdb.
See
https://wiki.freepascal.org/FPC_New_Features_3.2.0#GDB.2FMI_support

----------------------------------------------------------------------
jiaxing2 · 2020-05-16 07:25

Quote from: Cyrax on May 16, 2020, 09:19:42 amJust ignore that error
message, unless you are using the textmode editor (FP).

Thank you. I don't use the textmode IDE so I don't have to care about
it.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thaddy · 2020-05-16 07:41

I believe Lazarus already uses gdbmi for a long time, so in that case
ignore it indeed.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
MarkMLl · 2020-07-30 11:07

Quote from: Thaddy on May 16, 2020, 09:23:33 amYes, you can ignore it
or explicitly supply GDBMI=1 for building 3.0.4 when you build FPC
which is the default for 3.2.0 and trunk anyway. (and you have the
reverse option NOGDBMI=1 for those)
That way FPC will use the MI interface from gdb and does not look to
try to link to libgdb.
See
https://wiki.freepascal.org/FPC_New_Features_3.2.0#GDB.2FMI_support

I'm currently going through building a sequence of FPCs on i386 as a
fallback system (and to troubleshoot something which I suspect is
64-bit specific).

At what point should I stop using GDB_V607=1 and switch to GDBMI=1? Is
it strictly 3.2, or would it be realistic in 3.0.4/2/0?

MarkMLl

----------------------------------------------------------------------
PascalDragon · 2020-07-30 11:22

Quote from: MarkMLl on July 30, 2020, 01:07:28 pmAt what point should
I stop using GDB_V607=1 and switch to GDBMI=1? Is it strictly 3.2, or
would it be realistic in 3.0.4/2/0?

Yes, it's strictly 3.2 (and newer), considering that it is part of the
New Features list.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
MarkMLl · 2020-07-30 11:27

Quote from: PascalDragon on July 30, 2020, 01:22:14 pmQuote from:
MarkMLl on July 30, 2020, 01:07:28 pmAt what point should I stop using
GDB_V607=1 and switch to GDBMI=1? Is it strictly 3.2, or would it be
realistic in 3.0.4/2/0?

Yes, it's strictly 3.2 (and newer), considering that it is part of the
New Features list.

Thanks for that. I wasn't sure to what extent that should have been
interpreted as "all new in 3.2" as opposed to "is now preferred".

MarkMLl