X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-workers-bounces using -f
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 11:03:33 -0500
Message-Id: <200412071603.iB7G3X8c001599@envy.delorie.com>
From: DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com>
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
In-reply-to: <200412071801.32752.pavenis@latnet.lv> (message from Andris
	Pavenis on Tue, 7 Dec 2004 18:01:32 +0200)
Subject: Re: Patches to build GDB 6.3
References: <01c4c987$Blat.v2.2.2$52b9e920 AT zahav DOT net DOT il> <200412070924 DOT 41262 DOT pavenis AT latnet DOT lv> <200412071541 DOT iB7FfwvH001233 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com> <200412071801 DOT 32752 DOT pavenis AT latnet DOT lv>
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk


> > What is the patch you need?
> 
> It's not in official sources. All DWARF2 related stuff is only on our own 
> changes. 
> 
> For last tests I defined 
> #define DBX_REGISTER_REGNUM(n) svr4_dbx_register_map[n]
> and removed definition of DWARF_FRAME _REGNUM so it's defaults
> to DBX_REGISTER_REGNUM(n).

So... we're just renumbering dwarf registers?  Is our incompatible
scheme compatible with linux?  That would be the only non-technical
reason for such a change.

I think, if we need to break compatibility, we should plan on
coordinating the libc 2.04 release with a gcc 4.0 release, and make
the changes for that.  At least we'd stand a better chance of getting
everything that way.