From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24082 invoked by alias); 1 Aug 2002 01:33:21 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 24075 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2002 01:33:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 1 Aug 2002 01:33:20 -0000 Received: from int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (nat-pool-rdu.redhat.com [172.16.52.200] (may be forged)) by mx1.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g711Ktl13528 for ; Wed, 31 Jul 2002 21:20:55 -0400 Received: from potter.sfbay.redhat.com (potter.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.27.15]) by int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g711XHu03701; Wed, 31 Jul 2002 21:33:17 -0400 Received: from romulus.sfbay.redhat.com (IDENT:wXUH5tqTSnvas3uZsaDzAj1uHqTA8BDw@romulus.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.27.251]) by potter.sfbay.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g711XGm02410; Wed, 31 Jul 2002 18:33:16 -0700 Received: (from kev@localhost) by romulus.sfbay.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g711XEU24962; Wed, 31 Jul 2002 18:33:14 -0700 Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2002 18:40:00 -0000 From: Kevin Buettner Message-Id: <1020801013313.ZM24961@localhost.localdomain> In-Reply-To: Eric Christopher "Re: [PATCH] mips-tdep.c: Add "n64" to "set mips abi" help message" (Jul 31, 6:14pm) References: <1020731202815.ZM23228@localhost.localdomain> <3D486B72.AAFC6327@redhat.com> <1020731233211.ZM24389@localhost.localdomain> <1028164461.24184.49.camel@ghostwheel.cygnus.com> To: Eric Christopher Subject: Re: [PATCH] mips-tdep.c: Add "n64" to "set mips abi" help message Cc: Michael Snyder , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-SW-Source: 2002-07/txt/msg00651.txt.bz2 On Jul 31, 6:14pm, Eric Christopher wrote: > > > Perhaps we should add placeholders for those? > > > > Sounds right to me so long as they're really different from the ones > > we already have. > > > > I wouldn't worry about it. I put it in gcc because I was told it was > "almost complete" - almost 2 years ago. I pinged mips a few times and > haven't heard anything. I'll probably remove support for it in the next > few months if a final, useful, ABI doc doesn't materialize. Okay, we'll hold off on adding them then. Please let us know if you do ever see a final, useful ABI doc... Thanks, Kevin