From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3567 invoked by alias); 14 Jun 2007 17:09:52 -0000 Received: (qmail 3435 invoked by uid 22791); 14 Jun 2007 17:09:51 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mtagate6.de.ibm.com (HELO mtagate6.de.ibm.com) (195.212.29.155) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Thu, 14 Jun 2007 17:09:46 +0000 Received: from d12nrmr1607.megacenter.de.ibm.com (d12nrmr1607.megacenter.de.ibm.com [9.149.167.49]) by mtagate6.de.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l5EH9d591010810 for ; Thu, 14 Jun 2007 17:09:39 GMT Received: from d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com (d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com [9.149.165.228]) by d12nrmr1607.megacenter.de.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v8.3) with ESMTP id l5EH9dI73948560 for ; Thu, 14 Jun 2007 19:09:39 +0200 Received: from d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id l5EH9dQl003166 for ; Thu, 14 Jun 2007 19:09:39 +0200 Received: from tuxmaker.boeblingen.de.ibm.com (tuxmaker.boeblingen.de.ibm.com [9.152.85.9]) by d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with SMTP id l5EH9dhF003161; Thu, 14 Jun 2007 19:09:39 +0200 Message-Id: <200706141709.l5EH9dhF003161@d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com> Received: by tuxmaker.boeblingen.de.ibm.com (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Thu, 14 Jun 2007 19:09:39 +0200 Subject: Re: [rfc][0/13] Eliminate read_register et al To: brobecker@adacore.com (Joel Brobecker) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2007 17:09:00 -0000 From: "Ulrich Weigand" Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org In-Reply-To: <20070614170401.GC21293@adacore.com> from "Joel Brobecker" at Jun 14, 2007 10:04:01 AM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL2] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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/msg00282.txt.bz2 Joel Brobecker wrote: > > Just for clarification: was this a 32-bit or 64-bit sparc platform? > > It was 32bit. Did you need 64bit too? Some of the changes (in particular in the builtin_type patch set) are sparc64 specific, so I'd definitely appreciate a sparc64 test as well, if you have the platform available ... Thanks, Ulrich -- Dr. Ulrich Weigand GNU Toolchain for Linux on System z and Cell BE Ulrich.Weigand@de.ibm.com