From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5686 invoked by alias); 25 Feb 2003 21:21:34 -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 5679 invoked from network); 25 Feb 2003 21:21:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO duracef.shout.net) (204.253.184.12) by 172.16.49.205 with SMTP; 25 Feb 2003 21:21:33 -0000 Received: (from mec@localhost) by duracef.shout.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h1PLLWb11381; Tue, 25 Feb 2003 15:21:32 -0600 Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2003 21:21:00 -0000 From: Michael Elizabeth Chastain Message-Id: <200302252121.h1PLLWb11381@duracef.shout.net> To: ac131313@redhat.com, mludvig@suse.cz Subject: Re: [patch/rfc] Add a sentinel frame Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com X-SW-Source: 2003-02/txt/msg00662.txt.bz2 > Anyway, I've got an x86-64 gdb. You wouldn't have some patches to fix > sware's expect would you? Sware's expect doesn't appear to work :-( Would it be feasible to try stock expect? That's what I test with anyways. ftp://ftp2.sourceforge.net/pub/sourceforge/tcl/tcl8.4.1-src.tar.gz http://expect.nist.gov/src/expect-5.38.0.tar.gz ftp://ftp.gnu.org/dejagnu/dejagnu-1.4.3.tar.gz Sware expect dates to 1998-06-15, but sware tcl and sware dejagnu are actually almost identical to the latest released version. If it's not feasible to do this just forget I said anything. Michael C