From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13081 invoked by alias); 5 Jan 2002 14:07:18 -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 13033 invoked from network); 5 Jan 2002 14:07:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.science.uva.nl) (146.50.4.51) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 5 Jan 2002 14:07:10 -0000 Received: from soliton.wins.uva.nl [146.50.20.20] by mail.science.uva.nl with ESMTP (sendmail 8.11.6/config 11.24). id g05E6kL10109; Sat, 5 Jan 2002 15:06:47 +0100 (MET) Received: from localhost by soliton.wins.uva.nl (sendmail 8.11.6/config 11.15). id g05E6tC11463; Sat, 5 Jan 2002 15:06:55 +0100 (MET) Message-Id: <200201051406.g05E6tC11463@soliton.wins.uva.nl> Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2002 06:07:00 -0000 X-Organisation: Faculty of Science, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands X-URL: http://www.science.uva.nl/ From: Mark Kettenis To: thorpej@wasabisystems.com CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.cygnus.com In-reply-to: <20020104190350.K9599@dr-evil.shagadelic.org> (message from Jason R Thorpe on Fri, 4 Jan 2002 19:03:50 -0800) Subject: Re: [patch] Overhaul i386nbsd-nat.c, add support for XMM + ELF core files References: <20020104160746.H9599@dr-evil.shagadelic.org> <20020104190350.K9599@dr-evil.shagadelic.org> X-SW-Source: 2002-01/txt/msg00070.txt.bz2 Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 19:03:50 -0800 From: Jason R Thorpe On Sat, Jan 05, 2002 at 01:39:52AM +0100, Mark Kettenis wrote: > Is there any chance that I can convince you to make NetBSD use > i386bsd-nat.c instead of i386nbsd-nat.c? NetBSD is close enough to > FreeBSD and OpenBSD to be able to use the same basic functionality on > all of them. [From your first message] I'd really rather not (the other BSD's don't have the XMM functionality, for example), but I'll take a look to see if it's really feasible. My secret agenda of course is that when FreeBSD gets XMM functionality, GDB will already have the support for it :-). Likewise, when NetBSD implements support for the debug registers (which FreeBSD already has), the support will already be there! Note, i386nbsd-nat.c is still going to be necessary, since NetBSD uses different core files than the others. Sure! [From your second message] Alright, I did this; it wasn't quite as nasty as I thought it'd be. Well, I tried hard to write i386bsd.c such that it could be used on all BSD's :-). OK to commit? Yes please! Thanks, Mark