From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28532 invoked by alias); 21 Dec 2009 20:23:32 -0000 Received: (qmail 28523 invoked by uid 22791); 21 Dec 2009 20:23:32 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SARE_MSGID_LONG40,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from smtp-out.google.com (HELO smtp-out.google.com) (216.239.44.51) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 21 Dec 2009 20:23:27 +0000 Received: from wpaz1.hot.corp.google.com (wpaz1.hot.corp.google.com [172.24.198.65]) by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id nBLKNP6S000326 for ; Mon, 21 Dec 2009 12:23:25 -0800 Received: from ewy25 (ewy25.prod.google.com [10.241.103.25]) by wpaz1.hot.corp.google.com with ESMTP id nBLKNNbM005434 for ; Mon, 21 Dec 2009 12:23:24 -0800 Received: by ewy25 with SMTP id 25so6664910ewy.25 for ; Mon, 21 Dec 2009 12:23:22 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.216.90.7 with SMTP id d7mr438070wef.81.1261427002704; Mon, 21 Dec 2009 12:23:22 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20091221201921.GA27626@caradoc.them.org> References: <20091221201033.2B76C84412@ruffy.mtv.corp.google.com> <20091221201921.GA27626@caradoc.them.org> Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2009 20:23:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [patch] fix tkill_failed gcc warning in gdbserver From: Doug Evans To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-System-Of-Record: true X-IsSubscribed: yes 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: 2009-12/txt/msg00318.txt.bz2 On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 12:19 PM, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 12:10:33PM -0800, Doug Evans wrote: >> Hi. >> >> android doesn't have SYS_tkill but it does have __NR_tkill. > > Does it have the other SYS_ constants? =A0It's a weird omission. > Anyway, might as well use __NR_tkill unconditionally. It doesn't have any SYS_*. Sorry for the confusion. I would like to have used __NR_tkill unconditionally but I couldn't be sure removing SYS_tkill wouldn't break something. If you say it's ok, I'll remove it.