From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16587 invoked by alias); 16 Sep 2005 17:45:13 -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 16566 invoked by uid 22791); 16 Sep 2005 17:45:07 -0000 Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with ESMTP; Fri, 16 Sep 2005 17:45:07 +0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j8GHj6Wk008506 for ; Fri, 16 Sep 2005 13:45:06 -0400 Received: from pobox.corp.redhat.com (pobox.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.156]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id j8GHj6V31968 for ; Fri, 16 Sep 2005 13:45:06 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain (vpn50-50.rdu.redhat.com [172.16.50.50]) by pobox.corp.redhat.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id j8GHj5Qa016364 for ; Fri, 16 Sep 2005 13:45:05 -0400 Received: from ironwood.lan (ironwood.lan [192.168.64.8]) by localhost.localdomain (8.12.11/8.12.10) with ESMTP id j8GHj0UP031004 for ; Fri, 16 Sep 2005 10:45:00 -0700 Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2005 17:45:00 -0000 From: Kevin Buettner To: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH]*3 Re: [RFC] "info powerpc" Message-ID: <20050916104459.53f1eddd@ironwood.lan> In-Reply-To: <20050916135602.GA3473@nevyn.them.org> References: <200509091633.02630.pgilliam@us.ibm.com> <200509141710.39794.pgilliam@us.ibm.com> <20050916135602.GA3473@nevyn.them.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2005-09/txt/msg00115.txt.bz2 On Fri, 16 Sep 2005 09:56:02 -0400 Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > On Wed, Sep 14, 2005 at 05:10:39PM -0700, Paul Gilliam wrote: > > My least favorite is the third one. While it's a clean fix to the > > problem, it slams the door on any future 'info powerpc' sub-commands. > > It also requires a fix so that prefix commands without any > > sub-commands can be depreciated. Of course, we could just get rid of > > the "info powerpc" command without depreciating it for a while > > first.... > > If you just remove it, you don't slam the door on anything. We can add > it back the moment we've got a use for it. > > We have a common routine for printing vector registers; I would prefer > using "info vector" instead of extending "info powerpc". I favor this approach as well. Kevin