This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the GDB project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [RFA] Remove calls to inside_entry_file

On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 11:36:08AM -0500, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> >>> Per my previous comment, I'd prefer to not touch the old code at all - 
> >>> let it die.  Mark, I'll note, already has i386 replacement code in 
> >>waiting.
> >>> 
> >>> The other thing to do is to ask DanielJ if he knows anything more about 
> >>> that specific case.
> >
> >>
> >>Nope.  It was there before I put my hands on it; it seems suspicious to
> >>me though.
> >
> >
> >What do you mean by "suspicious"?  You did already comment on this in
> >blockframe.c so I assume you had rather mixed feelings about this call.
> >
> >I don't see a reason not to change this.  It will take some time to
> >move all targets to the new scheme.  Why should some of the not converted
> >targets remain broken due to an obvious bug?
> I'm beginning to think that reverting some of the original change:
> RFC: Mostly kill FRAME_CHAIN_VALID, add user knob
> might be the best option.  What about moving this:

I just want to make sure you realize that doing so would defeat the
point of the patch, which was to have the other quoted checks below
apply to all targets.  I'm trying to make the target-specific hooks
less powerful, not more.

But I guess this conversation's gone on so long that I've lost track of
what why this is causing a problem.  So maybe I'm missing something

Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]