From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28480 invoked by alias); 28 Feb 2010 18:10:36 -0000 Received: (qmail 28462 invoked by uid 22791); 28 Feb 2010 18:10:35 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-7.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sun, 28 Feb 2010 18:10:32 +0000 Received: from int-mx04.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx04.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.17]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o1SIAUMM022759 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Sun, 28 Feb 2010 13:10:30 -0500 Received: from host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx04.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o1SIAQDU008513 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Sun, 28 Feb 2010 13:10:29 -0500 Received: from host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o1SIAPUI019857; Sun, 28 Feb 2010 19:10:25 +0100 Received: (from jkratoch@localhost) by host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) id o1SIAPar019855; Sun, 28 Feb 2010 19:10:25 +0100 Date: Sun, 28 Feb 2010 18:10:00 -0000 From: Jan Kratochvil To: Hui Zhu Cc: gdb-patches ml Subject: Re: [RFA] patch for [Bug gdb/11253] Message-ID: <20100228181025.GA18652@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> References: <20100226125301.GB6773@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-08-17) 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: 2010-02/txt/msg00691.txt.bz2 Hi Hui, On Sun, 28 Feb 2010 16:37:56 +0100, Hui Zhu wrote: > I think your patch is more better. > Thanks. :) I wanted to submit now a comment to target.c INHERIT is deprecated but I have found now the notice is already there: NOTE: cagney/2003-10-17: The problem with this inheritance, as it is currently implemented, is that it discards any knowledge of which target an inherited method originally belonged to. Consequently, new new target methods should instead explicitly and locally search the target stack for the target that can handle the request. */ static void update_current_target (void) which proves my patch should be dropped, I just was not sure before. Sorry, Jan