From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-16629-listarch-gdb-patches=sourceware.cygnus.com@sources.redhat.com>
Received: (qmail 8972 invoked by alias); 2 Jul 2002 17:41:32 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sources.redhat.com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com
Received: (qmail 8120 invoked from network); 2 Jul 2002 17:41:20 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO takamaka.act-europe.fr) (142.179.108.207)
  by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 2 Jul 2002 17:41:20 -0000
Received: by takamaka.act-europe.fr (Postfix, from userid 507)
	id 8F32ED2F70; Tue,  2 Jul 2002 10:41:16 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Tue, 02 Jul 2002 10:41:00 -0000
From: Joel Brobecker <brobecker@gnat.com>
To: Jim Blandy <jimb@redhat.com>
Cc: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@cygnus.com>,
	gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [RFA] block_innermost_frame tweak
Message-ID: <20020702174116.GP17987@gnat.com>
References: <20020620131440.M397@gnat.com> <nphejxver5.fsf@zwingli.cygnus.com> <3D126D8A.9020908@cygnus.com> <np7kksv3zm.fsf@zwingli.cygnus.com> <3D138B65.8070401@cygnus.com> <npelf0s1mc.fsf@zwingli.cygnus.com> <3D13AEE9.10209@cygnus.com> <np3cvgqks2.fsf@zwingli.cygnus.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <np3cvgqks2.fsf@zwingli.cygnus.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i
X-SW-Source: 2002-07/txt/msg00032.txt.bz2

> Andrew Cagney <ac131313@cygnus.com> writes:
> > Oops, I guess we're back to frame_address_in_block() then?
> 
> Sure thing.

Sorry for letting this drag for so long. So is the last patch I
submitted fine if I replace get_frame_calling_pc by
frame_address_in_block?

I am including the previous changelog just as a "refresher".

Thanks,
-- 
Joel