This is the mail archive of the gdb@sources.redhat.com 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: objdump -M for x86

From: Andrew Cagney <ac131313 at cygnus dot com>
To: Alan Modra <amodra at bigpond dot net dot au>
Cc: binutils at sources dot redhat dot com, gdb at sources dot redhat dot com
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 01:37:44 -0500
Subject: Re: objdump -M for x86
References: <20011114134429.G6922@bubble.sa.bigpond.net.au> <3BF200F9.4070601@cygnus.com> <20011114174350.K6922@bubble.sa.bigpond.net.au> <3BF23030.4070201@cygnus.com> <20011114200754.M6922@bubble.sa.bigpond.net.au>

>> See my other e-mail.  I can't find anything that sets ->mach to 
>> .._intel_syntax so, apart from backward compatibility, I can't think of 
>> a reason to hang on to those ``machine'' variants.  I don't expect GDB 
>> to start using them again.
> 
> 
> "objdump -d -m i386:intel" sets it via bfd_default_scan from the entry
> in bfd/cpu-i386.c

Ahh.  (Sorry only just got back to this).  Groan.

Can I suggest a comment on the test indicating that this can happen -> 
stop me trying to delete ..._intel :-)

Andrew

References:
- Re: objdump -M for x86
  - From: Andrew Cagney
- Re: objdump -M for x86
  - From: Alan Modra
- Re: objdump -M for x86
  - From: Andrew Cagney
- Re: objdump -M for x86
  - From: Alan Modra

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