From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6176 invoked by alias); 24 Feb 2003 15:06:55 -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 6169 invoked from network); 24 Feb 2003 15:06:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO duracef.shout.net) (204.253.184.12) by 172.16.49.205 with SMTP; 24 Feb 2003 15:06:55 -0000 Received: (from mec@localhost) by duracef.shout.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h1OF6qv15932; Mon, 24 Feb 2003 09:06:52 -0600 Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2003 15:06:00 -0000 From: Michael Elizabeth Chastain Message-Id: <200302241506.h1OF6qv15932@duracef.shout.net> To: ac131313@redhat.com Subject: Re: [rfa] new test, pr-1090.exp, multi-register variables Cc: drow@mvista.com, fnasser@redhat.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com X-SW-Source: 2003-02/txt/msg00580.txt.bz2 Andrew C writes: > The only critical thing in GDB 5.4/6.0 is ensuring that the new EMACS > mode has everything it needs without relying on level two annotiations. > And that has a very hard deadline :-( When is that deadline? How close is MI to meeting supporting the new EMACS mode ? Michael C