From: Jason R Thorpe <thorpej@wasabisystems.com>
To: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@cygnus.com>
Cc: Michael Snyder <msnyder@redhat.com>, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFA] Don't gdbarch_init for core files
Date: Sat, 11 May 2002 20:30:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20020511203035.H3435@dr-evil.shagadelic.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3CDDD7ED.9080302@cygnus.com>; from ac131313@cygnus.com on Sat, May 11, 2002 at 10:48:13PM -0400
On Sat, May 11, 2002 at 10:48:13PM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> is [almost] no different to deleting the call - GDB isn't yet built with
> multiple architectures so the two architectures will always be identical.
>
> Looking at the date/author of the original patch [and making a wild
> guess], I think the original change was related to debugging 32 bit core
> files on a SPARC64 system. Michael?
Well, I know Solaris dumps a 32-bit core file for a 32-bit binary,
and a 64-bit core file for a 64-bit binary.
I simply fail to see any reason why you'd want to re-initialize the
gdbarch for a core file.
I guess I really do need to know why the change was added in the first
place (the message with the original patch doesn't describe the problem
the patch is trying to solve).
> For the moment, bfd's compatible() might be the best test (does it give
> the effect you're looking for?). The other approach is to enhance the
> relevant architecture vectors so that they don't change the architecture
> for cases like this. I think, eventually, the ABI/OS stuff will help
> solve this problem. Anway, what ever the change, it will need plenty
> comments :-)
Well, the question is -- how are the arch vectors supposed to tell
when they're supposed to update it and when they're not supposed to
update it?
Sigh, in any case, the current situation really sucks, as core file
handling is somewhat broken on any platform that has gdbarch'd OS ABI
handling.
--
-- Jason R. Thorpe <thorpej@wasabisystems.com>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-05-12 3:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-05-09 18:58 Jason R Thorpe
2002-05-09 20:04 ` Andrew Cagney
2002-05-09 21:21 ` Jason R Thorpe
2002-05-11 19:48 ` Andrew Cagney
2002-05-11 20:30 ` Jason R Thorpe [this message]
2002-05-11 20:46 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2002-05-16 16:24 ` Michael Snyder
2002-05-16 16:24 ` Michael Snyder
2002-05-16 17:33 ` Andrew Cagney
2002-05-17 6:58 m.m.kettenis
2002-05-17 10:47 ` Jason R Thorpe
2002-05-17 10:59 ` Michael Snyder
2002-05-17 16:06 ` Mark Kettenis
2002-05-17 10:54 ` Michael Snyder
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=20020511203035.H3435@dr-evil.shagadelic.org \
--to=thorpej@wasabisystems.com \
--cc=ac131313@cygnus.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com \
--cc=msnyder@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