From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5536 invoked by alias); 7 Mar 2006 05:23:17 -0000 Received: (qmail 5527 invoked by uid 22791); 7 Mar 2006 05:23:16 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Tue, 07 Mar 2006 05:23:15 +0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id k275NChh011879; Tue, 7 Mar 2006 00:23:12 -0500 Received: from pobox.corp.redhat.com (pobox.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.156]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id k275NC117001; Tue, 7 Mar 2006 00:23:12 -0500 Received: from free.oliva.athome.lsd.ic.unicamp.br (vpn50-81.rdu.redhat.com [172.16.50.81]) by pobox.corp.redhat.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id k275NBNN012238; Tue, 7 Mar 2006 00:23:12 -0500 Received: from free.oliva.athome.lsd.ic.unicamp.br (free.oliva.athome.lsd.ic.unicamp.br [127.0.0.1]) by free.oliva.athome.lsd.ic.unicamp.br (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id k275NALg011094; Tue, 7 Mar 2006 02:23:10 -0300 Received: (from aoliva@localhost) by free.oliva.athome.lsd.ic.unicamp.br (8.13.5/8.13.5/Submit) id k275NA2X011093; Tue, 7 Mar 2006 02:23:10 -0300 To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: add support for =?iso-8859-1?Q?`S=B4?= augmentation in dwarf2 debug info References: <20060304150719.GD20187@nevyn.them.org> From: Alexandre Oliva Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2006 14:21:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20060304150719.GD20187@nevyn.them.org> (Daniel Jacobowitz's message of "Sat, 4 Mar 2006 10:07:19 -0500") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.1007 (Gnus v5.10.7) XEmacs/21.4.18 (linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-03/txt/msg00108.txt.bz2 On Mar 4, 2006, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > On Fri, Mar 03, 2006 at 12:18:43PM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote: >> This patch introduces code to recognize and take advantage of the "S" >> augmentation, but makes no effort to remove existing machine-specific >> code. The testcase probably already worked without the change, but >> it's good to have it there to avoid regressions when someone decides >> to experiment with taking code out. > Is that enough justification for such a nasty testcase? And it's going > to need more work over time; for instance, old assemblers or libgccs > will fail to build it, producing a noisy ERROR. If the code changes are fine without the testcase, I'll be more than happy to check them in as such. Are they? -- Alexandre Oliva http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/ Secretary for FSF Latin America http://www.fsfla.org/ Red Hat Compiler Engineer aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org} Free Software Evangelist oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}