From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6419 invoked by alias); 11 Oct 2007 17:51:59 -0000 Received: (qmail 6409 invoked by uid 22791); 11 Oct 2007 17:51:58 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from pool-71-174-251-188.bstnma.fios.verizon.net (HELO ednor.cgf.cx) (71.174.251.188) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Thu, 11 Oct 2007 17:51:55 +0000 Received: by ednor.cgf.cx (Postfix, from userid 201) id D22B52B353; Thu, 11 Oct 2007 13:51:53 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2007 17:59:00 -0000 From: Christopher Faylor To: Ulrich Weigand , GDB Patches , Markus Deuling Subject: Re: [rfc] [13/17] Get rid of current_gdbarch in win32-nat.c Message-ID: <20071011175153.GA443@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> Mail-Followup-To: Ulrich Weigand , GDB Patches , Markus Deuling References: <470DE4B6.1050708@de.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <470DE4B6.1050708@de.ibm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-09) 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: 2007-10/txt/msg00305.txt.bz2 On Thu, Oct 11, 2007 at 10:54:14AM +0200, Markus Deuling wrote: > this patch gets rid of some of the current_gdbarch's in win32-nat.c. Maybe > someone can test this? I have no idea how to :-) > Thanks a lot. Is this ok to commit? > > ChangeLog: > > * win32-nat.c (do_win32_fetch_inferior_registers, win32_resume) > (do_win32_store_inferior_registers): Use get_regcache_arch to get at > the current architecture by regcache. I'm sorry. I'm a little confused. If you're offering a patch why can't you test it? Wouldn't that be considered a prerequisite for a patch? cgf