From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 923 invoked by alias); 28 Apr 2004 16:43:17 -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 916 invoked from network); 28 Apr 2004 16:43:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 28 Apr 2004 16:43:17 -0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i3SGhGKI014073 for ; Wed, 28 Apr 2004 12:43:16 -0400 Received: from localhost.redhat.com (to-dhcp51.toronto.redhat.com [172.16.14.151]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i3SGhEv32025; Wed, 28 Apr 2004 12:43:15 -0400 Received: from gnu.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2061B2B9D; Wed, 28 Apr 2004 12:43:13 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <408FDF20.7000306@gnu.org> Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2004 16:43:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-GB; rv:1.4.1) Gecko/20040217 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: orjan.friberg@axis.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Multiplexed registers and invalidating the register cache References: <407D242B.109@axis.com> <20040414144607.GA5700@nevyn.them.org> <407E67EA.80701@axis.com> <407E70FD.7060709@axis.com> <407EAA4B.7000500@gnu.org> <407FD693.2080804@axis.com> <408030DB.3080708@gnu.org> <4083DE9C.7000208@axis.com> <40869FC4.2090407@gnu.org> <4087CF61.4030109@axis.com> <4087D794.10209@gnu.org> <4088FD0F.7050501@axis.com> <408927CF.10807@gnu.org> <40893437.2020907@axis.com> <4089636D.2090605@gnu.org> <7137-Sat24Apr2004113105+0300-eliz@gnu.org> In-Reply-To: <7137-Sat24Apr2004113105+0300-eliz@gnu.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2004-04/txt/msg00638.txt.bz2 >>> Date: Fri, 23 Apr 2004 14:41:49 -0400 >>> From: Andrew Cagney >>> >> >>>> > +The target's register contents has changed. >> >>> >>> FYI, this should probably read: >>> The target's memory or register contents have [has?] changed. >>> eli? > > > I'm not sure; what is the difference between the two wordings? "have" sounds right (...), hmm. Check dictionary ``/has/ 3rd person _singular_, present of /have/'' [canadian oxford] so "have" is correct. Andrew