From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26732 invoked by alias); 10 Jun 2013 14:56:10 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 26722 invoked by uid 89); 10 Jun 2013 14:56:10 -0000 X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_NO autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.84/v0.84-167-ge50287c) with ESMTP; Mon, 10 Jun 2013 14:56:10 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7CEAE2EA96; Mon, 10 Jun 2013 10:56:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from rock.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rock.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id q+NNhLRAxgkb; Mon, 10 Jun 2013 10:56:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45F672EA5A; Mon, 10 Jun 2013 10:56:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id C934CC2B31; Mon, 10 Jun 2013 18:56:06 +0400 (RET) Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2013 14:56:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Luis Machado Cc: Mark Kettenis , gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: Assuming types for PC Message-ID: <20130610145606.GG3941@adacore.com> References: <51B5E06A.8020807@codesourcery.com> <201306101431.r5AEVAfb007850@glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <51B5E3D4.9010105@codesourcery.com> <20130610144520.GF3941@adacore.com> <51B5E76A.5000208@codesourcery.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <51B5E76A.5000208@codesourcery.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-SW-Source: 2013-06/txt/msg00025.txt.bz2 > Right. I did some archaeology and ended up at that commit, aimed at > testing for an internal error fix rather than the correct type of > PC. Ah, ok :). > I didn't find the reasoning particularly clear. Then again, i'm just > asking to be sure. :-) Maybe another way of saying this would be "it should, unless proven otherwise". In your case, it sounds like you are saying "it might", or perhaps "some platforms don't", to which Mark is replying "show me" (backed by the architecture manuals) :-) :-) :-). -- Joel