From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 30545 invoked by alias); 2 Aug 2002 00:08:46 -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 30538 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2002 00:08:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 2 Aug 2002 00:08:45 -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 g71NuDl22703 for ; Thu, 1 Aug 2002 19:56:13 -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 g7208hu11502; Thu, 1 Aug 2002 20:08:43 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain (remus.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.27.252]) by potter.sfbay.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g7208gm09129; Thu, 1 Aug 2002 17:08:42 -0700 Subject: Re: [RFA] mips_push_arguments(): Make O64 ABI test explicit From: Eric Christopher To: Kevin Buettner Cc: Daniel Jacobowitz , Michael Snyder , ac131313@redhat.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com In-Reply-To: <1020802000235.ZM31037@localhost.localdomain> References: <1020731210452.ZM23445@localhost.localdomain> <3D486843.8007D610@redhat.com> <1020731232203.ZM24308@localhost.localdomain> <3D4870EB.BB9C282A@redhat.com> <1020801011054.ZM24816@localhost.localdomain> <1020801013004.ZM24890@localhost.localdomain> <20020801013959.GA15821@nevyn.them.org> <1028246063.29012.9.camel@ghostwheel.cygnus.com> <1020802000235.ZM31037@localhost.localdomain> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Thu, 01 Aug 2002 17:08:00 -0000 Message-Id: <1028246822.25615.11.camel@ghostwheel.cygnus.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-SW-Source: 2002-08/txt/msg00041.txt.bz2 On Thu, 2002-08-01 at 17:02, Kevin Buettner wrote: > On Aug 1, 4:54pm, Eric Christopher wrote: > > > > inclined to go with SGI CC's interpretation; you should complain at > > > Eric some more to get GCC fixed properly. Lord knows I haven't had > > > much luck :P > > > > > > > Yeesh. I'll get to it, as soon as you can fetch me a document describing > > what should happen... (and no, "look at irix's compiler" is not a good > > answer) ;) > > What about > > http://techpubs.sgi.com/library/tpl/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?coll=0650&db=bks&srch=&fname=/SGI_Developer/Mpro_n32_ABI/sgi_html/ch02.html > > ? That'll probably do. :) I'll take a look at it when I get a chance. -eric -- I don't want a pony, I want a rocket powered jetpack!