From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5617 invoked by alias); 12 Aug 2013 11:07:32 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 5599 invoked by uid 89); 12 Aug 2013 11:07:31 -0000 X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-8.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_WL,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.84/v0.84-167-ge50287c) with ESMTP; Mon, 12 Aug 2013 11:07:31 +0000 Received: from int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r7CB7Sim001454 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 12 Aug 2013 07:07:28 -0400 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.11]) by int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r7CB7QSG012828; Mon, 12 Aug 2013 07:07:27 -0400 Message-ID: <5208C1ED.3050901@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2013 11:07:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130625 Thunderbird/17.0.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Sergio Durigan Junior CC: Joern Rennecke , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] Implement gdbarch_gdb_signal_{to,from}_target References: <20130810214926.eqls003q8gg44sso-nzlynne@webmail.spamcop.net> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2013-08/txt/msg00296.txt.bz2 On 08/12/2013 04:51 AM, Sergio Durigan Junior wrote: > Sorry, but how are you building this? I'm having trouble reproducing > the failure. I suppose you're building a GDB for AVR only, which is > probably not building linux-tdep.o, where both > linux_gdb_signal_{to,from}_target functions are defined. > > There is no avr-linux-tdep.c, which means that when we're not building > for a Linux target such functions won't be available because > linux-tdep.o won't be built. I'm not sure how to solve this specific > problem (whether to propose this avr-linux-tdep or to solve this with > #ifdef's). Opinions are welcome. There should be an avr-linux-tdep.c, and Linux things should be moved there. -- Pedro Alves