From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6668 invoked by alias); 2 Apr 2003 17:03:00 -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 6661 invoked from network); 2 Apr 2003 17:02:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (207.219.125.105) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 2 Apr 2003 17:02:59 -0000 Received: from redhat.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7FA3A2B23; Wed, 2 Apr 2003 12:02:58 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <3E8B17C2.4090209@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2003 17:03:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20030223 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Daniel Jacobowitz Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFA] Remove calls to inside_entry_file References: <3E84E8B4.7000502@redhat.com> <20030401153125.GY18138@cygbert.vinschen.de> <3E89B2AA.5060304@redhat.com> <20030401161824.GA18138@cygbert.vinschen.de> <3E89BFE4.7020500@redhat.com> <20030401170307.GD18138@cygbert.vinschen.de> <3E89CCC9.7040908@redhat.com> <20030401195832.GA10202@nevyn.them.org> <20030402092741.GA26480@cygbert.vinschen.de> <3E8B1178.6050605@redhat.com> <20030402164231.GB26981@nevyn.them.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2003-04/txt/msg00034.txt.bz2 >> I'm beginning to think that reverting some of the original change: >> >> RFC: Mostly kill FRAME_CHAIN_VALID, add user knob >> http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/2002-12/msg00683.html >> >> might be the best option. What about moving this: > > > I just want to make sure you realize that doing so would defeat the > point of the patch, which was to have the other quoted checks below > apply to all targets. I'm trying to make the target-specific hooks > less powerful, not more. > > But I guess this conversation's gone on so long that I've lost track of > what why this is causing a problem. So maybe I'm missing something > important. The original change broke assembler backtraces for at least xstormy16 and cygwin. Andrew