From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14306 invoked by alias); 27 Mar 2002 04:34:49 -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 14279 invoked from network); 27 Mar 2002 04:34:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (24.112.240.27) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 27 Mar 2002 04:34:48 -0000 Received: from cygnus.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD6753C9E; Tue, 26 Mar 2002 23:33:04 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <3CA14B80.90003@cygnus.com> Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2002 20:34:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:0.9.8) Gecko/20020210 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Daniel Jacobowitz Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [rfa] Use shared signals/signals.c in gdbserver References: <20020324183657.A14633@nevyn.them.org> <3CA13FB9.8030401@cygnus.com> <20020326225343.A10641@nevyn.them.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2002-03/txt/msg00528.txt.bz2 > On Tue, Mar 26, 2002 at 10:42:49PM -0500, Andrew Cagney wrote: > >> >2002-03-24 Daniel Jacobowitz >> > >> >* gdbserver/server.c (main): Call target_signal_to_host_p >> > and target_signal_to_host on signals received from the remote. >> > * gdbserver/remote-utils.c (prepare_resume_reply): Call >> > target_signal_from_host on signals sent to the remote. >> > * gdbserver/server.h: Add prototypes. Include "gdb/signals.h". >> > * gdbserver/Makefile.in: Add signals.o. Add -I${INCLUDE_DIR}. >> > > >> >> yep, by me. > > > Thanks! > > Two questions go with that: > - OK for branch also, if I just add the two new files > (signals/signals.c and include/gdb/signals.h) and don't > change GDB to use them? In a few days, perhaps. Yes. > - Was: > http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/2002-03/msg00464.html > an approval? This patch depends on that one. No, but it could have been :-) As far as I know you're drumming your fingers for a few days while waiting to see if there were any other comments (before committing). Andrew