Re: RFA: handle missing fpregs

[Jim Blandy <jimb at redhat dot com>]

Kevin Buettner <kevinb@redhat.com> writes:
> On 07 May 2004 16:05:11 -0500
> Jim Blandy <jimb@redhat.com> wrote:
> 
> > > > +     /* On RS6000 variants that have no floating-point registers, the
> > > > +        next two members will be -1.  */
> > > 
> > > I'm not comfortable with the term "RS6000 variants" here.  I'd be happier
> > > with "PPC variants", though that's probably not strictly correct either.
> > > I suppose you could just say "On cores that have no floating-point
> > > registers...".
> > 
> > The issue is that people might not immediately see all PPC's as RS6000
> > variants, right?  Fair enough.  "RS6000 variants" is historically
> > correct, but it's not like anyone has fabricated an RS6000 in recent
> > history.  I've changed that to "On PPC and RS6000 variants that ...".
> 
> Okay, that's fine.
> 
> Your revised patch is okay to commit.
> 
> Thanks!

Actually, I just realized that the NetBSD stuff needs Jason Thorpe's
approval.  Since the change needs to go in all at once or not at all,
I've backed out whole change, pending Jason's review.