From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7965 invoked by alias); 12 Jun 2007 13:45:18 -0000 Received: (qmail 7950 invoked by uid 22791); 12 Jun 2007 13:45:18 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from NaN.false.org (HELO nan.false.org) (208.75.86.248) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Tue, 12 Jun 2007 13:45:16 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2689A982F2 for ; Tue, 12 Jun 2007 13:45:14 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (22.svnf5.xdsl.nauticom.net [209.195.183.55]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B57B982DC for ; Tue, 12 Jun 2007 13:45:11 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1Hy6gX-0003hF-HM for gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Tue, 12 Jun 2007 09:45:25 -0400 Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2007 13:45:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [rfc][1/13] Eliminate read_register: write_register in solib-sunos.c Message-ID: <20070612134525.GB7815@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <200706072057.l57KvBBL019253@d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200706072057.l57KvBBL019253@d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.15 (2007-04-09) X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2007-06/txt/msg00156.txt.bz2 On Thu, Jun 07, 2007 at 10:57:11PM +0200, Ulrich Weigand wrote: > Hello, > > this patch eliminates the use of write_register in solib-sunos.c. > As discussed when I've originally posted the patch, the whole > "if (DECR_PC_AFTER_BREAK)" block is questionable, and the correct > solution might be to completely remove it. I'd prefer that - unfortunately I believe Mark is travelling now so it may be a while before he can test it. I suppose that if you're feeling really brave, you could try running OpenBSD in aranym. Actually, i386-openbsd3.3 in qemu would probably be much easier. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery