Re: [rfa/threads] Eliminate lin-lwp.c

[Andrew Cagney <cagney@gnu.org>]

> I do not think that leaving these functions where they are will
> complicate the process of cleaning them up.  Could you explain
> why you see this as a problem?

As with inf-child and inf-ptrace, an important objective here is to get 
all the inf-linux methods local to a file so that we can ensure that all 
accesses are strictly via the target vector.  Leaving them where they 
are defeats this, a little.

>>linux-inf.c?  inf-linux.c is equally (if not more) consistent with the 
>>> new inf-ptrace.c and inf-child.c.
> 
> 
> inf-* are currently more or less target agnostic; just "unixy".

inf-child, the current root object is very un "unixy".

 > GDB
> convention says that native support for Linux - that's what this is -
> belongs in linux-nat.c.  If some of it is left in lin-lwp.c for
> historical reasons, that's a separate issue.

Here we're going to end up with:

	inf-i386-linux is-a inf-linux (is-a inf-ptrace?) is-a inf-child

Lets not be shy with the code base.  inf-linux.c, containing the 
inf-linux class, is going to be far more consistent in the long term. 
(the only alt I see is a name reversal of linux-inf, child-inf, 
ptrace-inf, ...).

What about I fix up i386 and then come back for the others?

Andrew