Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 09, 2005 at 09:19:17AM +0000, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> 
>>In porting gdb to a new architecture, I came across a number of core gdb
>>bugs.   Here is the first set of them and addresses the following issues,
>>
>>1) we did not allow 'extended-remote' targets to use tracepoints.
>>
>>2) We could only trace architectures with 64 registers, not 256 like
>>a comment suggested.
>>
>>3) There was an erroneous comment about tracing memory ranges
>>
>>4) If a ^D was entered when entering the 'actions' list, we'd create
>>a NULL action, which would cause a segfault when tracing started.

> Some bits of this are OK, some aren't (and I'd want Michael's opinion
> on them).  In particular, the tracepoint remote protocol packets don't
> appear to be documented; so I'm not sure about the strtol change.  Your
> change is definitely wrong one way or another, because it depends on
> the size of "long" on the host.  You're passing a long* to sscanf where
> it expects an unsigned long*.  If we expect a hex-encoded 32-bit
> result, then let's parse it that way explicitly.

ok. I've installed the attached patch, which are the uncontraversial
bits.  I'll address the strtol one separately.

nathan

-- 
Nathan Sidwell    ::   http://www.codesourcery.com   ::     CodeSourcery LLC
nathan@codesourcery.com    ::     http://www.planetfall.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk