From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19013 invoked by alias); 3 Jun 2010 17:12:31 -0000 Received: (qmail 18993 invoked by uid 48); 3 Jun 2010 17:12:30 -0000 Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2010 17:12:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20100603171230.18992.qmail@sourceware.org> From: "tromey at redhat dot com" To: gdb-prs@sourceware.org In-Reply-To: <20020503093800.7627.ac131313@redhat.com> References: <20020503093800.7627.ac131313@redhat.com> Reply-To: sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org Subject: [Bug tdep/7627] Is gdbarch_bits_big_endian needed? X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC Mailing-List: contact gdb-prs-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-prs-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2010-q2/txt/msg00359.txt.bz2 ------- Additional Comments From tromey at redhat dot com 2010-06-03 17:12 ------- BTW, I asked on #gcc and Ian said: On ARM bits are always little-endian, but bytes are configurable on MIPS bits are always little-endian but bytes are usually big-endian (though again configurable) It is a little surprising to me that none of these cases have ever been reported as gdb bugs. -- http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=7627 ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.