From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Received: (qmail 23878 invoked from network); 10 Apr 2004 17:20:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO takamaka.act-europe.fr) (142.179.108.108) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 10 Apr 2004 17:20:09 -0000 Received: by takamaka.act-europe.fr (Postfix, from userid 507) id 18E7F47D63; Sat, 10 Apr 2004 10:20:10 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2004 17:20:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Randolph Chung Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [patch] fix unwind handling on hppa elf targets Message-ID: <20040410172010.GI1114@gnat.com> References: <20040410094328.GA31873@tausq.org> <20040410165744.GH1114@gnat.com> <20040410174501.GB31873@tausq.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040410174501.GB31873@tausq.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-SW-Source: 2004-04/txt/msg00244.txt.bz2 On Sat, Apr 10, 2004 at 10:45:01AM -0700, Randolph Chung wrote: > > It looks like the value of is_elf is undefined in the case of hppa32-hpux. > > I think you need to set it to zero in hppa_gdbarch_init(). > > hrm, i thought the struct is zero-filled, but you are right, i guess it > is not. Perhaps this is what we should do? I've never been a fan of zero-filling, but that might be because I come from Ada. > > I'd like to be given some time to test this patch on hppa32 and hppa64 > > before this gets checked in. Would that be ok? > > pls do. i do try to test hpux2.0w, but i don't have access to a narrow > hpux machine to test. Have you already tested this patch on hpux-2.0w? That would probably save me a fair bit of time if I didn't have to. -- Joel