From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 31315 invoked by alias); 10 Dec 2004 20:47:11 -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 31281 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2004 20:47:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 10 Dec 2004 20:47:08 -0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.34 #1 (Debian)) id 1CcrfQ-00005i-6C for ; Fri, 10 Dec 2004 15:47:08 -0500 Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 21:35:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [rfc] dummy calls for hppa64-hpux Message-ID: <20041210204708.GA17127@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <20041209050558.GD29171@tausq.org> <20041210180102.GX29171@tausq.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20041210180102.GX29171@tausq.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.5.1+cvs20040105i X-SW-Source: 2004-12/txt/msg00276.txt.bz2 On Fri, Dec 10, 2004 at 10:01:02AM -0800, Randolph Chung wrote: > In reference to a message from Randolph Chung, dated Dec 08: > > this patch is not yet ready for inclusion, i'm only posting it for > > comments because it's rather unorthodox. > > ok, here's another unfinished idea..... Dave Anglin suggested an > alternative scheme to me that seems more robust. I haven't written the > code for it yet, but here's a 50-line comment to explain it. Comments > before i try it? :) I think this looks a whole lot better. If the space you're in can't make inter-space calls, you probably won't need to do this anyway, so issuing an error message is fine. -- Daniel Jacobowitz