From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20506 invoked by alias); 9 Jan 2007 13:42:10 -0000 Received: (qmail 20498 invoked by uid 22791); 9 Jan 2007 13:42:09 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from sibelius.xs4all.nl (HELO brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl) (82.92.89.47) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Tue, 09 Jan 2007 13:42:00 +0000 Received: from brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl (kettenis@localhost.sibelius.xs4all.nl [127.0.0.1]) by brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l09DeRiA030859; Tue, 9 Jan 2007 14:40:27 +0100 (CET) Received: (from kettenis@localhost) by brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.13.8/8.13.8/Submit) id l09DeQhf027728; Tue, 9 Jan 2007 14:40:26 +0100 (CET) Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2007 13:42:00 -0000 Message-Id: <200701091340.l09DeQhf027728@brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl> From: Mark Kettenis To: deuling@de.ibm.com CC: gdb@sources.redhat.com In-reply-to: <45A372C5.6020700@de.ibm.com> (message from Markus Deuling on Tue, 09 Jan 2007 11:47:33 +0100) Subject: Re: Difference between infptrace and inf-ptrace References: <45A372C5.6020700@de.ibm.com> Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2007-01/txt/msg00139.txt.bz2 > Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2007 11:47:33 +0100 > From: Markus Deuling > > Hi, > > its not clear to me what the difference is between infptrace.c and inf-ptrace.[ch]. > > I think infptrace.c is the older one. Is it necessary to have both? Shouldn't one interface > to ptrace be sufficient? Yes, infptrace.c has to die. Don't look at it, except if you want to convert an existing configuration to inf-ptrace.c. Unfortunately we're not quite there yet :(. Mark