From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4982 invoked by alias); 23 Feb 2011 20:22:06 -0000 Received: (qmail 4974 invoked by uid 22791); 23 Feb 2011 20:22:05 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail.codesourcery.com (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (38.113.113.100) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 23 Feb 2011 20:22:01 +0000 Received: (qmail 30165 invoked from network); 23 Feb 2011 20:21:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO scottsdale.localnet) (pedro@127.0.0.2) by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 23 Feb 2011 20:21:59 -0000 From: Pedro Alves To: Tom Tromey Subject: Re: [rfa/rfc] Build libcommon.a for gdb and gdbserver Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2011 20:28:00 -0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.5 (Linux/2.6.35-25-generic; KDE/4.6.0; x86_64; ; ) Cc: Yao Qi , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <4D30E23F.3080103@codesourcery.com> <201102231833.46704.pedro@codesourcery.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201102232021.57283.pedro@codesourcery.com> X-IsSubscribed: yes 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: 2011-02/txt/msg00653.txt.bz2 On Wednesday 23 February 2011 20:09:15, Tom Tromey wrote: > Pedro> I'm confused. How is this different from reverting Yao's original patch? > > Crud, I guess it isn't. > I thought his patch moved signals.c but looking back I see it didn't. > > I am going to stop poking my nose in here. > I am ok with any route forward. I wasn't objecting. I agree with going back. We're seeing more trouble than benefit from configure+Makefile under common/ at this point. But I'd prefer to do an actual revert, just to make sure we don't inadvertently leave something behind or forget something. -- Pedro Alves