Mirror of the gdb-patches mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
To: Markus Deuling <deuling@de.ibm.com>
Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, uweigand@de.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [rfc] [17/17] Get rid of current_gdbarch in go32-nat.c
Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 20:25:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <u640yuchm.fsf@gnu.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <471C3E2C.3010509@de.ibm.com> (message from Markus Deuling on 	Mon, 22 Oct 2007 08:07:40 +0200)

> Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 08:07:40 +0200
> From: Markus Deuling <deuling@de.ibm.com>
> CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, uweigand@de.ibm.com
> 
> > Sorry for asking this so late, but could you please explain the
> > reason(s) why these changes are a good idea, i.e. what potential
> > problem(s) are they trying to solve?  If I tell you that the go32
> > (a.k.a. DJGPP) native build of GDB supports only a single
> > architecture, would those reason(s) still hold?
> > 
> 
> sorry for the late respone. I've been on vacation.
> Please see here: http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2007-10/msg00108.html

Thanks for the pointer.  Unfortunately, it does not answer my question
above.  Perhaps the earlier thread (to which it refers without stating
a URL) does, in which case I'd like to read that earlier thread.

> What I'll try to achieve is to get rid of the global variable current_gdbarch to have a real per-frame architecture. 

Yes, but why?  It looks like getting rid of current_gdbarch is needed
to support the situation where multiple architectures are supported in
the same session (or maybe even in the same executable?).  That is why
I asked the second question above: the DJGPP native build of GDB
supports only a single architecture, and will ever support only that
single architecture.  So the question is: is there any particular
reason to get rid of current_gdbarch in go32-nat.c?


  reply	other threads:[~2007-10-22 20:22 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-10-11  8:56 Markus Deuling
2007-10-12 10:56 ` Eli Zaretskii
2007-10-22  7:44   ` Markus Deuling
2007-10-22 20:25     ` Eli Zaretskii [this message]
2007-10-23 10:31       ` Markus Deuling
2007-10-23 21:15         ` Eli Zaretskii
2007-10-23 21:55           ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2007-10-24  4:08             ` Eli Zaretskii
2007-10-24 11:48               ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2007-10-24 19:24                 ` Eli Zaretskii
2007-10-24 13:39             ` Ulrich Weigand

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=u640yuchm.fsf@gnu.org \
    --to=eliz@gnu.org \
    --cc=deuling@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
    --cc=uweigand@de.ibm.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox