From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23166 invoked by alias); 8 May 2008 19:00:16 -0000 Received: (qmail 23158 invoked by uid 22791); 8 May 2008 19:00:15 -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; Thu, 08 May 2008 18:59:51 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 71DF5983F2; Thu, 8 May 2008 18:59:45 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (22.svnf5.xdsl.nauticom.net [209.195.183.55]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D43A98011; Thu, 8 May 2008 18:59:45 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1JuBLE-0008Hg-KB; Thu, 08 May 2008 14:59:44 -0400 Date: Thu, 08 May 2008 21:19:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Ulrich Weigand Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [rfa] gdbserver multiple register set issue: target description in remote_attach Message-ID: <20080508185944.GB31519@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Ulrich Weigand , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <200805081829.m48ITkXu004692@d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200805081829.m48ITkXu004692@d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-12-11) 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: 2008-05/txt/msg00289.txt.bz2 On Thu, May 08, 2008 at 08:29:46PM +0200, Ulrich Weigand wrote: > What do you think? Would this be OK for mainline? Agreed, this looks correct to me. Thanks! -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery