From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13110 invoked by alias); 5 Nov 2003 21:43:29 -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 13091 invoked from network); 5 Nov 2003 21:43:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO walton.kettenis.dyndns.org) (213.93.115.144) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 5 Nov 2003 21:43:25 -0000 Received: from elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org (elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org [192.168.0.2]) by walton.kettenis.dyndns.org (8.12.6p3/8.12.6) with ESMTP id hA5LhCq2000507; Wed, 5 Nov 2003 22:43:12 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from kettenis@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org) Received: from elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org (8.12.6p3/8.12.6) with ESMTP id hA5LhCV9020078; Wed, 5 Nov 2003 22:43:12 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from kettenis@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org) Received: (from kettenis@localhost) by elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org (8.12.6p3/8.12.6/Submit) id hA5LhB79020073; Wed, 5 Nov 2003 22:43:11 +0100 (CET) Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 21:43:00 -0000 Message-Id: <200311052143.hA5LhB79020073@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org> From: Mark Kettenis To: cagney@gnu.org CC: jjohnstn@redhat.com, kevinb@redhat.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, marcel@xcllnt.net In-reply-to: <3FA9619F.8030803@gnu.org> (message from Andrew Cagney on Wed, 05 Nov 2003 15:46:23 -0500) Subject: Re: RFA: ia64 patch required after recent osabi changes References: <3FA83E8D.8070709@redhat.com> <1031105022032.ZM25505@localhost.localdomain> <3FA95EDE.4000502@redhat.com> <3FA9619F.8030803@gnu.org> X-SW-Source: 2003-11/txt/msg00067.txt.bz2 Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 15:46:23 -0500 From: Andrew Cagney > Patch checked in. This fixes the regression with the new osabi > code and ia64 signal handling backtrace without having to remove > the assertion. Nice. So everyone's clear, the assertion is correct and needed. The function is forcing an architecture switch so if the switch fails (what the assertion was checking) GDB's a bit stuffed. Great! Thanks folks, for resolving this issue. Mark