From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-59811-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 4227 invoked by alias); 10 Nov 2008 23:10:54 -0000
Received: (qmail 4165 invoked by uid 22791); 10 Nov 2008 23:10:54 -0000
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from sibelius.xs4all.nl (HELO sibelius.xs4all.nl) (82.92.89.47)     by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Mon, 10 Nov 2008 23:10:17 +0000
Received: from brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl (kettenis@localhost.sibelius.xs4all.nl [127.0.0.1]) 	by brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id mAANACQD004646; 	Tue, 11 Nov 2008 00:10:12 +0100 (CET)
Received: (from kettenis@localhost) 	by brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) id mAANACGk029777; 	Tue, 11 Nov 2008 00:10:12 +0100 (CET)
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 03:00:00 -0000
Message-Id: <200811102310.mAANACGk029777@brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl>
From: Mark Kettenis <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl>
To: brobecker@adacore.com
CC: gingold@adacore.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org
In-reply-to: <20081110230116.GI5112@adacore.com> (message from Joel Brobecker 	on Mon, 10 Nov 2008 15:01:17 -0800)
Subject: Re: [RFA] Darwin Port (Part 1: changes in common files)
References: <6C04CB59-A202-4D7E-B2DA-97DAE3F3ED85@adacore.com> <200811101858.mAAIwoKj009428@brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <20081110230116.GI5112@adacore.com>
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb-patches.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2008-11/txt/msg00202.txt.bz2

> Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2008 15:01:17 -0800
> From: Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com>
> 
> > > +   GDB_OSABI_DARWIN,
> > > +   GDB_OSABI_DARWIN64,
> > > +
> > >      GDB_OSABI_INVALID		/* keep this last */
> > >    };
> > 
> > Why do you need both Darwin and Darwin64?  We don't do this for other
> > operating systems that have both a 32-bit and a 64-bit variant.
> 
> I looked at the way we do things, and I think that it simplifies
> the code a little. But I also think that it should be possible do
> without - this seems like a reasonable request, given that this
> would be consistent will all the other 32+64bit architectures.

Yes, that is indeed my concern.  Doing things in a similar way to
other architectures makes things easier to maintain.