Re: [rfa] Always define all of TARGET_SIGNAL_*

[Andrew Cagney <ac131313@cygnus.com>]

> I'm thinking of the net effect pulling both this patch and the other 
>> pending signal patch onto the 5.1 would have.  (I'm not sure if you ment 
>> this or that I was confusing this patch with the other pending patches :-)
> 
> 
> The only patch I'd particularly like in 5.2 (not 5.1 :)) is the one to
> make gdbserver use signals.h, which I was going to address after this
> one was done (just to reduce confusion, not because of any dependence). 
> I personally believe that pulling the others, particularly this one,
> into 5.2 will do no more harm than pulling them into the trunk; every
> day we leave them there is just a greater chance they'll be used this
> way.

I'm certaionly ok with (re-)pulling include/gdb/signals.h and 
include/gdbserver into the 5.2 branch - just as long as core GDB on the 
branch doesn't get modified to use them.  This is also why I think 
sitting on this enum patch until 5.2 is released is best/easiest.

As for what you posted, yep ok.  But after 5.2 :-)  Perhaphs a bug 
report so it isn't forgotten.

enjoy,
Andrew