Re: [4/10] RFC: unconditionally include signal.h

Tom Tromey
2012-11-27T20:14:31Z

>>>>> "Pedro" == Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com> writes:

Pedro> On 15-11-2012 19:24, Tom Tromey wrote:
>> I think that checking for signal.h is pointless, because gdb already
>> includes it unconditionally in various places -- e.g., utils.c.

Pedro> It's not pointless in gdbserver. The HAVE_SIGNAL_H checks were added for
Pedro> the WinCE port. See fe7cf52e.

Thanks.
I think I will just drop this patch from the series.

Tom