From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9660 invoked by alias); 8 Oct 2007 14:12:43 -0000 Received: (qmail 9538 invoked by uid 22791); 8 Oct 2007 14:12:42 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from ics.u-strasbg.fr (HELO ics.u-strasbg.fr) (130.79.112.250) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Mon, 08 Oct 2007 14:12:37 +0000 Received: from ICSMULLER (laocoon.u-strasbg.fr [130.79.112.72]) by ics.u-strasbg.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F9F2187024; Mon, 8 Oct 2007 16:17:18 +0200 (CEST) From: "Pierre Muller" To: "'Joel Brobecker'" Cc: "'Mark Kettenis'" , References: <009d01c809a7$a52fc9a0$ef8f5ce0$@u-strasbg.fr> <200710081326.l98DQs62013226@brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <009f01c809b1$f15c5280$d414f780$@u-strasbg.fr> <20071008135843.GL3570@adacore.com> In-Reply-To: <20071008135843.GL3570@adacore.com> Subject: RE: [RFA] ARI fix: Replace dirent.h by gdb_dirent.h in linux-fork.c Date: Mon, 08 Oct 2007 14:12:00 -0000 Message-ID: <000001c809b5$4c51a9d0$e4f4fd70$@u-strasbg.fr> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Content-Language: en-us Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2007-10/txt/msg00153.txt.bz2 The include ordering stuff seems completely opaque to me anyhow. is included as last in linux-fork.c, but right after "defs.h" in breakpoint.c. Is there any rational for this? Anyhow, if you also agree, it is probably best to leave the ordering exactly as it was, just to stay on the safe side. Should I move the gdb_wait.h include back to where wait.h was? Pierre > -----Original Message----- > From: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org [mailto:gdb-patches- > owner@sourceware.org] On Behalf Of Joel Brobecker > Sent: Monday, October 08, 2007 3:59 PM > To: Pierre Muller > Cc: 'Mark Kettenis'; gdb-patches@sourceware.org > Subject: Re: [RFA] ARI fix: Replace dirent.h by gdb_dirent.h in linux- > fork.c > > > Maybe, but in my latest commit to linux-fork.c I did exactly > > the same operation for the wait header, and moved it up from > > the system includes to the local "header.h" includes, > > and Joel told me that this was the right thing to do... > > Maybe I was wrong :-o. Seriously, the reason why I said yes at the time > is because I didn't think it would make a difference. I don't think > it will make a difference here either, but Mark's approach is less > prone to cause unexpected behavior changes. > > -- > Joel