From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13885 invoked by alias); 22 Aug 2002 18:35:24 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 13877 invoked from network); 22 Aug 2002 18:35:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (216.138.202.10) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 22 Aug 2002 18:35:23 -0000 Received: from ges.redhat.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F7643C48; Thu, 22 Aug 2002 14:35:21 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <3D652EE9.6010601@ges.redhat.com> Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2002 11:39:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:1.0.0) Gecko/20020810 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Michael Snyder Cc: Jim Blandy , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, kevinb@redhat.com, cagney@redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFC] fixing extract_struct_value_address References: <3D6418C5.FBF117D@redhat.com> <3D65250B.51A65480@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2002-08/txt/msg00703.txt.bz2 > Adding such a field to the generic dummy frame is a good idea -- > but some architectures don't use the generic dummy frames. That can be fixed by converting the architecture to generic dummy frames :-) Andrew