This is the mail archive of the
gdb@sourceware.cygnus.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: i386: Are we settled?
> Maybe it would be a good idea to change the #defines of the register
> numbers such that they match the names that GDB uses in its output,
> i.e. FISEG_REGNUM instead of FCS_REGNUM, etc.
Yeah, that was the original intent, but I forgot to change the CPP
symbol names when I renamed the registers. Rats; I wish I'd noticed
this before Chris and Eli started adapting their tm-*.h files. Let's
wait on this until folks have submitted changes for their ports, and
then I can make all the changes atomically with `M-x
tags-query-replace'.
> Notably missing from this list are any other questions about tm-i386.h
> as it stands. Am I correct in thinking that the other x86 port
> maintainers think it's basically sane?
>
> Yes. For the Hurd the only things I have to define in tm-i386gnu.h
> are Mach/Hurd specific.
Great. Three down, three to go. I'm waiting for JKJ, HJL, and JTC.
> (Again, I'm excluding issues related to `long double'; I do expect
> folks to retain their own definitions for coping with that.)
>
> I think we should try to unify those too, but that might be done later.
Right --- these and the Pascal issues can be dealt with next.