This is the mail archive of the
gdb@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: New Sanyo Stormy16 relocations
- From: Doug Evans <dje at transmeta dot com>
- To: Doug Evans <dje at transmeta dot com>
- Cc: DJ Delorie <dj at delorie dot com>, binutils at sources dot redhat dot com, cgen at sources dot redhat dot com, sid at sources dot redhat dot com, gdb at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 12:14:11 -0800 (PST)
- Subject: Re: New Sanyo Stormy16 relocations
- References: <1039041358.28757.307.camel@p4><20021204225643.GS27956@bubble.sa.bigpond.net.au><1039043233.28767.313.camel@p4><200212170353.gBH3r9f14238@envy.delorie.com><15871.31192.305439.813418@casey.transmeta.com><200212171947.gBHJl3P23665@envy.delorie.com><15871.33865.254007.550012@casey.transmeta.com>
Doug Evans writes:
> > > But, if approval is required, methinks binutils is a better place to
> > > provide approval for .opc changes (e.g. complaints about warnings :-).
> >
> > Better than sid? Better than gdb?
>
> I don't understand. The context here is .opc. files.
> Changes to .opc files don't affect sid or gdb. Only binutils.
[flipping the pedantic bit]
Ok, gdb uses the disassembler.
Still, if src/opcodes is ok for binutils, I don't think
it's a problem for gdb or sid.
And if it is, the problem can be dealt with as it arises.