Re: [csl-am] missing SIGTRAP

[Mark Kettenis <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl>]

   Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2005 11:04:54 -0400
   From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>

   On Fri, Apr 29, 2005 at 03:18:04PM +0100, Paul Brook wrote:

   > It appears that the builtin simulators use host signal numbers to
   > communicate with gdb. This causes problems on windows hosts
   > because SIGTRAP isn't defined. The attached patch provides a
   > definition for SIGTRAP if the host doesn't have one. This
   > probably isn't the "right way" to fix this, but it's near enough
   > for our purposes.
   > 
   > Applied to csl-arm-20050325-branch.
   > 
   > Paul
   > 
   > 2005-04-29  Paul Brook  <paul@codesourcery.com>
   > 
   > 	* gdb/remote-sim.c (SIGTRAP): Provide default defnition.
   > 	* gdb/signals/signals.c (SIGRAP): Ditto.

   I was going to ignore this patch for mainline, since it indeed isn't
   the right way.  Then I took a look at the simulators and how much of a
   PAIN it's going to be to migrate them off of host signal numbers.

   Does anyone object to the inclusion of this patch?

The problem here is the fact that the simulator tries to map host
events and simulator events to the same thing isn't it?  I'm not too
concerned with the simulators, but I think someone who does care
should really fix this.  Meanwhile I don't object to a local hack in
gdb/remote-sim.c.

However, I *do* object to the change to gdb/signals/signals.c.  This
is supposed to be a host to target mapping of signals.  Making it
pretend that the host has SIGTRAP while it doesn't is a truly bad
thing to do.

Mark