From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3459 invoked by alias); 25 Mar 2005 18:50:46 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 3449 invoked from network); 25 Mar 2005 18:50:41 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO sibelius.xs4all.nl) (82.92.89.47) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 25 Mar 2005 18:50:41 -0000 Received: from elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl (root@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl [192.168.0.2]) by sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id j2PInKGC023620; Fri, 25 Mar 2005 19:49:20 +0100 (CET) Received: from elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl (kettenis@localhost.sibelius.xs4all.nl [127.0.0.1]) by elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id j2PInJFd023352; Fri, 25 Mar 2005 19:49:19 +0100 (CET) Received: (from kettenis@localhost) by elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.13.3/8.13.3/Submit) id j2PInBBr029982; Fri, 25 Mar 2005 19:49:11 +0100 (CET) Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 18:50:00 -0000 Message-Id: <200503251849.j2PInBBr029982@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> From: Mark Kettenis To: mark@codesourcery.com CC: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com In-reply-to: <200503220817.j2M8H3Aw024182@sethra.codesourcery.com> (message from Mark Mitchell on Tue, 22 Mar 2005 00:17:03 -0800) Subject: Re: PATCH: Refactor ser-unix.c References: <200503220817.j2M8H3Aw024182@sethra.codesourcery.com> X-SW-Source: 2005-03/txt/msg00313.txt.bz2 Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 00:17:03 -0800 From: Mark Mitchell This patch splits ser-unix.c into two files: * ser-base.c, which contains functions that have nothing to do with UNIX, and * ser-unix.c, which contains functions that are either (a) UNIX-specific, or (b) deal with the "hardwire" serial interface. The purpose of this patch is that for non-Cygwin Windows, we want the functions in ser-base.c, but not those in ser-unix.c. Makes sense to me. There are no changes to any of the routines; this is purely code motion. In order to keep the patch easiser to read, I did not rename the ser-base.c routines with a ser_base prefix instead of the current ser_unix prefix, but I would like to make that change before check-in. Yes, please; the ser_unix prefix doesn't really make sense for the functions in set-base.c. I presume is also makes sense to drop the _nop_ in that operation. You may check in this patch and than do the rename in a seperate patch, or do it both at once. Consider the rename patch pre-approved. Mark