Re: [PRELIMINARY]: Patch to add bfd support for IBM s390

[DJBARROW at de dot ibm dot com]

Sure thing I'm going back home till Thursday so apologies for the lack of
correspondance,
Is 5.0 adequete or should I move to something newer.



D.J. Barrow Linux for S/390 kernel developer
eMail: djbarrow@de.ibm.com,barrow_dj@yahoo.com
Phone: +49-(0)7031-16-2583
IBM Germany Lab, Schönaicherstr. 220, 71032 Böblingen


Michael Snyder <msnyder@redhat.com> on 25.08.2000 19:35:34

Please respond to Michael Snyder <msnyder@redhat.com>

To:   Denis Joseph Barrow/Germany/Contr/IBM@IBMDE
cc:   gdb-patches@sourceware.cygnus.com, Martin
      Schwidefsky/Germany/IBM@IBMDE
Subject:  Re: [PRELIMINARY]: Patch to add bfd support for IBM s390




DJBARROW@de.ibm.com wrote:
>
> Sorry I was referring to hardware watchpoints when making this comment.
>
> The breakpoint.c kludge I did as far as I remember is probably unwanted,
I
> just found that the
> hardware breakpoints in 4-18 were in absolutely terrible shape staying in
> when not wanted &
> disappearing for no reason, has this code improved ?, my clueless kludge
> improved the situation a tiny
> bit in the test cases I was playing with.
> I haven't had a chance to see whether the 5.0 code has improved
> substantially in my opinion
> this code needs a lot of attention by someone who knows it, if this code
> has improved recently
> please leave this out.

How about if we remove it from your base port submission,
and revisit it if necessary after?