From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26476 invoked by alias); 4 Apr 2008 17:53:40 -0000 Received: (qmail 26465 invoked by uid 22791); 4 Apr 2008 17:53:39 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from NaN.false.org (HELO nan.false.org) (208.75.86.248) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Fri, 04 Apr 2008 17:53:19 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17AE6983BE; Fri, 4 Apr 2008 17:53:18 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (22.svnf5.xdsl.nauticom.net [209.195.183.55]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D396C982C4; Fri, 4 Apr 2008 17:53:17 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Jhq6G-0008Ko-Le; Fri, 04 Apr 2008 13:53:16 -0400 Date: Sat, 05 Apr 2008 15:56:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Joel Brobecker Cc: gdb@sourceware.org, Mark Kettenis , Ulrich Weigand Subject: Re: [RFC] Using values to handle unwinding Message-ID: <20080404175316.GA31744@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Joel Brobecker , gdb@sourceware.org, Mark Kettenis , Ulrich Weigand References: <20071017160350.GA26804@caradoc.them.org> <20080331220500.GA21611@caradoc.them.org> <20080404173710.GE24753@adacore.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080404173710.GE24753@adacore.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-12-11) X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2008-04/txt/msg00046.txt.bz2 Thanks for looking at them! On Fri, Apr 04, 2008 at 10:37:10AM -0700, Joel Brobecker wrote: > > I'd love comments on the patches, the overall approach, and how to > > proceed. Ideally, we check this in (breaking many targets), update > > each target completely as someone needs that target, and make sure all > > targets are updated by the next release of GDB. I personally use > > amd64, i386, arm, mips, m68k, and powerpc; so I'm pretty likely to > > update all of those (mechanically). I'll do the laggards before the > > next release too, but not right this minute. I would appreciate > > assistance with other targets :-) > > You said "mechanically" - does it mean you are not able to test some > of the targets you listed? I can test a representative triplet. But there's a wide variety of OS tdep files with sniffers; the patches I've already posted change about a dozen targets, only one of which I can readily test. So a certain amount of mechanical conversion and proofreading is the best I can do. > We can use a second pair of eyes as our means of testing... Yes indeed :-) -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery