Re: status of NTPL patches

[Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com>]

On Fri, Jun 27, 2003 at 12:17:20PM -0400, J. Johnston wrote:
> 
> Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> >On Fri, Jun 27, 2003 at 08:48:04AM -0700, David Carlton wrote:
> >
> >>What's the status of the NTPL patches?  Are they all in mainline yet?
> >>I'm about to sync my branch with mainline, and I'm curious if I'm
> >>allowed to tell my local users that it's okay to use it with Red Hat
> >>9.0 yet.
> >
> >
> >I believe that it should work.
> >
> 
> They are all committed except for Michael's rewrite of the gcore patch 
> which I haven't
> seen a commit notice for yet.  I don't see any reason it can't be checked 
> in - Michael?

Do you mean:
2003-06-19  Michael Snyder  <msnyder@redhat.com>

        * linux-nat.h: New file.
        * linux-nat.c: Include linux-nat.h.
        * lin-lwp.c: Include linux-nat.h.  
        Move struct lwp_info def to linux-nat.h.
        * linux-proc.c: Include linux-nat.h.  
        (linux_make_note_section): Iterate over lwps instead of threads.
        (linux_do_thread_registers): Use lwp instead of merged pid.
        * config/nm-linux.h: Move miscelaneous def'ns to linux-nat.h.
        * Makefile.in (lin-lwp.o, linux-proc.o, linux-nat.o): 
        Add dependency on linux_nat_h.

?


> There is also an unresolved issue with gdbserver.

That's a bit of an understatement... well, hopefully it won't be too
hard, but I won't have time to look at it for another project or two.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer