Re: [PATCH] Makefile.in includes linux-record.c to be common for all arch. (arm-reversible>phase-3)

[Hui Zhu <teawater@gmail.com>]

On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 7:49 PM, oza Pawandeep <oza.pawandeep@gmail.com> wrote:
> Yes I agree; as I integrated both of them and post them at once.
> sorry about confusion; this patch has to be ignored.
>
> In fact I wanted this patch to be approved first because without which
> sys call patch would not compile.


Why you cannot commit a patch list when the function is done?
I think the function in the trunk tree need be done before commit to
it.  If you want work in cvs, I suggest you use the branch first.

On the other hand, I heard that some of code of arm record is checked
in.  I don't think it is right.  Because without syscall support, it
cannot work, right?
So what I suggest is move all the code about arm record to a separate
branch.  And when all of the arm record function done, you re-send all
of them.

Thanks,
Hui



>
> Regards,
> Oza.
>
> On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 2:54 PM, Yao Qi <yao@codesourcery.com> wrote:
>> On 06/18/2012 05:08 PM, oza Pawandeep wrote:
>>> diff -urN orig/configure.tgt new/configure.tgt
>>> --- orig/configure.tgt        2012-06-18 12:36:47.274501400 +0530
>>> +++ new/configure.tgt 2012-06-18 12:31:47.335501400 +0530
>>> @@ -76,7 +76,7 @@
>>>  arm*-*-linux*)
>>>       # Target: ARM based machine running GNU/Linux
>>>       gdb_target_obs="arm-tdep.o arm-linux-tdep.o glibc-tdep.o \
>>> -                     solib-svr4.o symfile-mem.o linux-tdep.o"
>>> +                     solib-svr4.o symfile-mem.o linux-tdep.o linux-record.o"
>>>       build_gdbserver=yes
>>>       ;;
>>>  arm*-*-netbsd* | arm*-*-knetbsd*-gnu)
>>>
>>> ok to check in ?
>>
>> It is not good to post the same change twice in different mails.  This
>> change makes no sense until your 'arm-syscall record' patch is approved.
>>  I noticed that this change has been included in your 'arm-syscall
>> record' patch, so I think patch here doesn't have to reviewed.
>>
>> --
>> Yao (齐尧)
>>
>>