From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8700 invoked by alias); 23 Oct 2009 15:09:16 -0000 Received: (qmail 8690 invoked by uid 22791); 23 Oct 2009 15:09:16 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mailhost.u-strasbg.fr (HELO mailhost.u-strasbg.fr) (130.79.200.157) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 23 Oct 2009 15:09:11 +0000 Received: from baal.u-strasbg.fr (baal.u-strasbg.fr [IPv6:2001:660:2402::41]) by mailhost.u-strasbg.fr (8.14.2/jtpda-5.5pre1) with ESMTP id n9NF8x5Q013841 ; Fri, 23 Oct 2009 17:08:59 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from muller@ics.u-strasbg.fr) Received: from mailserver.u-strasbg.fr (ms2.u-strasbg.fr [IPv6:2001:660:2402:d::11]) by baal.u-strasbg.fr (8.14.0/jtpda-5.5pre1) with ESMTP id n9NF8xDx080450 ; Fri, 23 Oct 2009 17:08:59 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from muller@ics.u-strasbg.fr) Received: from d620muller (gw-ics.u-strasbg.fr [130.79.210.225]) (user=mullerp mech=LOGIN) by mailserver.u-strasbg.fr (8.14.3/jtpda-5.5pre1) with ESMTP id n9NE4aRC051271 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NO) ; Fri, 23 Oct 2009 16:04:36 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from muller@ics.u-strasbg.fr) From: "Pierre Muller" To: "'Eli Zaretskii'" Cc: , , , References: <4AD91D72.1030802@vmware.com> <4ADE1612.9040708@vmware.com> <4ADE167F.2020309@vmware.com> <4AE0B40B.5020802@vmware.com> <8ac60eac0910221340y2ad104fo5e4229f017957a5b@mail.gmail.com> <4AE0C669.5020001@vmware.com> <8ac60eac0910221425q63b78a7cnb92b0ddf1c8f5e61@mail.gmail.com> <8ac60eac0910221745t3ef6eb56ra6609086ad07f23@mail.gmail.com> <8ac60eac0910221803p2b45453bu17473aa7e9453a60@mail.gmail.com> <006001ca53be$25d1ab70$71750250$@u-strasbg.fr> <837humh1bn.fsf@gnu.org> In-Reply-To: <837humh1bn.fsf@gnu.org> Subject: RE: [RFA, 3 of 3] save/restore process record, part 3 (save/restore) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2009 15:09:00 -0000 Message-ID: <001b01ca53e9$c3687a50$4a396ef0$@u-strasbg.fr> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2009-10/txt/msg00581.txt.bz2 > -----Message d'origine----- > De=A0: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org [mailto:gdb-patches- > owner@sourceware.org] De la part de Eli Zaretskii > Envoy=E9=A0: Friday, October 23, 2009 12:06 PM > =C0=A0: Pierre Muller > Cc=A0: ppluzhnikov@google.com; msnyder@vmware.com; teawater@gmail.com; > gdb-patches@sourceware.org > Objet=A0: Re: [RFA, 3 of 3] save/restore process record, part 3 > (save/restore) >=20 > > From: "Pierre Muller" > > Cc: "'Hui Zhu'" , "'Eli Zaretskii'" > , > > > > Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2009 10:52:27 +0200 > > > > Furthermore, there is a '%ll' rule > > in ARI that states that: > > Do not use printf("%ll"), instead use printf("%s",phex()) to dump a > `long > > long' value > > Shouldn't this also concern '%lu'? >=20 > There is a difference: %lu is defined by C89, while %ll is only > codified by C9X. GDB does not yet require a C9X compiler. Whoops, OK, %ll is for 'long long' types, whereas %lu is for 'unsigned long'... Consider this part of my email as unfounded. Sorry, all and thanks for the explanation, Eli. Pierre Muller ... still a poor in C language :(