From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8666 invoked by alias); 28 Mar 2003 21:39:41 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 8659 invoked from network); 28 Mar 2003 21:39:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO takamaka.act-europe.fr) (142.179.108.108) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 28 Mar 2003 21:39:40 -0000 Received: by takamaka.act-europe.fr (Postfix, from userid 507) id 7A90BD34B8; Fri, 28 Mar 2003 13:39:35 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2003 21:39:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Andrew Cagney Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [6] What if EXTRA_FRAME_INFO wasn't required Message-ID: <20030328213935.GZ924@gnat.com> References: <3E84BFD5.3080304@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3E84BFD5.3080304@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-SW-Source: 2003-03/txt/msg00390.txt.bz2 > If the need to convert EXTRA_FRAME_INFO was dropped as a barrier to > having HP/UX multi-arch partial, would anything else be left? If my notes are still correct, the answer is no. I think I can double-check sometime this afternoon. (this is for hppa 32 bits, hppa 64 bits is slightly more difficult for me, due to a lack of a convenient development machine... The testdrive program work well enough, but I must say they do not provide the most friendly environment) > I'm wondering how much further the bar needs to be lowered before HP/UX > accidently falls over the multi-arch requirement [#include vision of > HP/UX trying to play the `the stick game', where the sole objective is > to jump / step / fall / crawl over a stick lying flat on the ground, and > still failing :-] :-). -- Joel (Funny you would ask this today, I was about to have a look at this macro this afternoon)