From: "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz@gnu.org>
To: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>
Cc: cagney@gnu.org, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [patch/rfc] Eliminate TARGET_HAS_HARDWARE_WATCHPOINTS
Date: Thu, 09 Sep 2004 03:41:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <01c4961e$Blat.v2.2.2$d00fd3e0@zahav.net.il> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20040908152315.GA28927@nevyn.them.org> (message from Daniel Jacobowitz on Wed, 8 Sep 2004 11:23:15 -0400)
> Date: Wed, 8 Sep 2004 11:23:15 -0400
> From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>
> Cc: Andrew Cagney <cagney@gnu.org>, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
>
> Why should the macro matter for remote targets? We should ask the
> target whether watchpoints are available.
So you are suggesting to replace a configure-time test and the macro
with a run-time test?
> For cross-compiled build, autoconf should work just fine. Compile
> tests are still available and you shouldn't be using run tests for this
> sort of thing anyway.
I don't think this kind of test can be done by compiling a program,
but if you have a specific test in mind, please describe it.
In any case, if what you suggest works, I agree to replacing the macro
with these alternatives.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-09-09 3:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-09-05 13:59 Andrew Cagney
2004-09-06 5:03 ` Eli Zaretskii
2004-09-06 14:05 ` Andrew Cagney
2004-09-06 18:47 ` Eli Zaretskii
2004-09-07 21:20 ` Andrew Cagney
2004-09-08 3:51 ` Eli Zaretskii
2004-09-08 14:28 ` Andrew Cagney
2004-09-08 15:18 ` Eli Zaretskii
2004-09-08 15:23 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-09-09 3:41 ` Eli Zaretskii [this message]
2004-09-09 3:53 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-09-09 4:04 ` Eli Zaretskii
2004-09-09 12:47 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-09-09 18:52 ` Eli Zaretskii
2004-09-12 16:33 ` Andrew Cagney
2004-09-12 18:42 ` Eli Zaretskii
2004-09-13 14:30 ` Andrew Cagney
2004-09-13 19:43 ` Eli Zaretskii
2004-09-13 20:48 ` Andrew Cagney
2004-09-15 7:20 ` Eli Zaretskii
2004-09-15 16:11 ` Andrew Cagney
2004-09-16 10:53 ` Eli Zaretskii
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='01c4961e$Blat.v2.2.2$d00fd3e0@zahav.net.il' \
--to=eliz@gnu.org \
--cc=cagney@gnu.org \
--cc=drow@false.org \
--cc=gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox