This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [patch/rfc] default REGISTER_VIRTUAL_SIZE and REGISTER_RAW_SIZE to register_size
- From: Richard Earnshaw <rearnsha at arm dot com>
- To: Andrew Cagney <ac131313 at cygnus dot com>
- Cc: Richard dot Earnshaw at arm dot com, gdb-patches at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Wed, 08 May 2002 10:37:55 +0100
- Subject: Re: [patch/rfc] default REGISTER_VIRTUAL_SIZE and REGISTER_RAW_SIZE to register_size
- Organization: ARM Ltd.
- Reply-to: Richard dot Earnshaw at arm dot com
> > ac131313@cygnus.com said:
> >
> >> Hmm, remember that think-o bug I posted?
> >
> >
> >
> > Hmm, yes. Do you remember promising to write some docs on how this was
> > all supposed to work?
>
>
> Like:
>
> http://sources.redhat.com/gdb/onlinedocs/gdbint_9.html#SEC70
>
> (which I didn't write). I've have just posted:
>
> http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/2002-05/msg00123.html
>
> which, I think, fixes part of the doco.
>
Ok, you win!
Actually, it was the regcache model that I was thinking about when I said
that... Sorry for confusing things.
http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb/2002-02/msg00254.html
and
http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb/2002-02/msg00255.html
where you said:
> I'll try to do the long (add to documentation answer, in about a
> week - this really does need to be documented.
R