From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26474 invoked by alias); 6 Mar 2012 10:35:37 -0000 Received: (qmail 26429 invoked by uid 22791); 6 Mar 2012 10:35:36 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 06 Mar 2012 10:35:24 +0000 Received: from int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q26AZ2fn009668 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 6 Mar 2012 05:35:02 -0500 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q26AZ0wY025698; Tue, 6 Mar 2012 05:35:01 -0500 Message-ID: <4F55E854.7040500@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2012 10:35:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:10.0.1) Gecko/20120216 Thunderbird/10.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jan Kratochvil CC: Tristan Gingold , Mark Kettenis , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [patch 1/2] libunwind/ia64: Rename libunwind-frame.[ch] References: <20120304215728.GA2763@host2.jankratochvil.net> <4F55C2BB.7090205@redhat.com> <201203060843.q268h5JN006761@glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <0EAB4374-907D-4ACD-85F6-089DB5E22BA8@adacore.com> <4F55DC4A.5020108@redhat.com> <20120306095236.GA6427@host2.jankratochvil.net> In-Reply-To: <20120306095236.GA6427@host2.jankratochvil.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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: 2012-03/txt/msg00182.txt.bz2 On 03/06/2012 09:52 AM, Jan Kratochvil wrote: > On Tue, 06 Mar 2012 10:43:38 +0100, Pedro Alves wrote: >> I could live quite well without the tdep bit, thus, ia64-libunwind-frame.[hc]; >> or, since we're really using libunwind's libunwind-ia64.h and libunwind-ia64.so, >> we could also go with libunwind-ia64-frame.[hc]. > > I find "tdep" important there, that it is really a target-only file. > > I had rather an idea ia64-tdep-libunwind.[ch]. That's fine with me as well. Mark, do you have a preference? -- Pedro Alves