From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Fernando Nasser To: Momchil Velikov Cc: GDB Patch List Subject: Re: [Fwd: [patch] UDP transport support] Date: Sat, 01 Apr 2000 00:00:00 -0000 Message-ID: <38E4F1CD.9265272D@cygnus.com> References: <38E39B66.3857BDFD@fadata.bg> X-SW-Source: 2000-q1/msg01139.html Message-ID: <20000401000000.D2mKW0fQjzUrji97Jan6EVNOmMqq92RC2ZvUsmsHtMc@z> > Do you mind changing the syntax the parameter NAME to > serial.c:serial_open () to > tcp::, and > udp:: > for TCP and UDP connections, respectively ? Hi, Please make sure tcp is assumed by default so the current behavior is not changed. -- Fernando Nasser Red Hat - Toronto E-Mail: fnasser@cygnus.com 2323 Yonge Street, Suite #300 Tel: 416-482-2661 ext. 311 Toronto, Ontario M4P 2C9 Fax: 416-482-6299 >From kingdon@redhat.com Sat Apr 01 00:00:00 2000 From: Jim Kingdon To: gdb-patches@sourceware.cygnus.com Subject: Re: Patches to add i387 support to Solaris x86 platforms Date: Sat, 01 Apr 2000 00:00:00 -0000 Message-id: References: <200002240845.JAA27280@reisser.regent.e-technik.tu-muenchen.de> X-SW-Source: 2000-q1/msg00379.html Content-length: 309 Hello again Peter! Funny that we've both ended up back on the GDB beat after all these years. > The following patches add i387 support for Solaris x86 platforms I didn't see any problems with those patches. I don't see a maintainer listed for Solaris x86, so I guess this falls to Andrew or Stan. >From rearnsha@arm.com Sat Apr 01 00:00:00 2000 From: Richard Earnshaw To: Scott Bambrough Cc: rearnsha@arm.com Subject: Re: RFC: Patch to arm-tdep.c -- Register flavors Date: Sat, 01 Apr 2000 00:00:00 -0000 Message-id: <200002161539.PAA12704@cam-mail2.cambridge.arm.com> References: <38AAC291.38C9F512@netwinder.org> X-SW-Source: 2000-q1/msg00182.html Content-length: 1027 > > And finally, the ps register name is wrong, especially in the A{T}PCS area > > but also more generally; the name is "cpsr" in all ARM documentation (the > > "ps" name comes from when the processor flags weren't really a separate > > register -- they were in the unused parts of r15 -- so there was no name). > > Richard is correct here, in arm-linux-nat.c, I initialize the PS register with > the contents of CPSR if arm_apcs_32 is set, or with the contents of the PC if > not. Perhaps we should set the register name based on this information as well. This is one of the few cases where I would just delete the old name. Old processors never had a specific flags register, so the 'ps' name was 'invented' by the original porter of gdb. Since then the cpsr name has come into use and I doubt that even users debugging in 26-bit mode would object violently to this name changing (maybe we can support "ps" as an alias when parsing user input, but I see no point in ever printing anything other than "cpsr". R.