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: [PATCH]*3 Re: [RFC] "info powerpc"

On Wed, Sep 14, 2005 at 05:10:39PM -0700, Paul Gilliam wrote:
> My least favorite is the third one.  While it's a clean fix to the
> problem, it slams the door on any future 'info powerpc' sub-commands. 
> It also requires a fix so that prefix commands without any
> sub-commands can be depreciated.  Of course, we could just get rid of
> the "info powerpc" command without depreciating it for a while
> first....

If you just remove it, you don't slam the door on anything.  We can add
it back the moment we've got a use for it.

We have a common routine for printing vector registers; I would prefer
using "info vector" instead of extending "info powerpc".

How on earth did these tests get added to the FSF sources without the
command they're testing?  Ah-hah, they didn't.  This is why repository
history and ChangeLogs are so useful.

2002-08-20  Elena Zannoni  <>

        * rs6000-tdep.c (altivec_register_p): Delete.
        (rs6000_do_altivec_registers): Delete.
        (rs6000_altivec_registers_info): Delete.
        (rs6000_do_registers_info): Delete.
        (_initialize_rs6000_tdep): Remove command 'info powerpc altivec'.
        (rs6000_gdbarch_init): Remove setting of do_registers_info.


It was Elena's goal to get rid of 'info powerpc altivec'; she just
didn't update the testsuite, apparently.

Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC

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