From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17962 invoked by alias); 24 Mar 2002 22:54:56 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 17946 invoked from network); 24 Mar 2002 22:54:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (24.112.240.27) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 24 Mar 2002 22:54:47 -0000 Received: from cygnus.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A9643DCF; Sun, 24 Mar 2002 17:54:46 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <3C9E5936.9040900@cygnus.com> Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2002 14:54:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:0.9.8) Gecko/20020210 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Daniel Jacobowitz Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Where to put gdb/gdbserver-shared code? References: <20020324163436.A6026@nevyn.them.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2002-03/txt/msg00220.txt.bz2 > There was some discussion a month or so about sharing signals.c between gdb > and gdbserver. Month or so [ago]? http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb/2002-03/msg00058.html > This comes up fairly often; we never quite decided how to treat it. Kevin > seemed to be of the school that says there should be no code sharing, and > Andrew leant the other way (as I remember - apologies for > misrepresentation!). I dislike it in general, and having just eliminated > every last bit of it I'm reluctant to introduce more, but signals.c is a > good candidate if ever there was one. > > Ignoring that for the moment though, if we are going to share it, where > should we keep it? We could keep it in a directory clearly describing its > role ("native" or "utils") or clearly describing its status as shared ("common"). > I don't want to leave it where it is if it's going to be shared. > > Since I don't see the transition to lots and lots of common, shareable code > with well-defined boundaries in our near future, I lean towards "common". > Longer term, I'd prefer something like "native/utils/" and a well-described > allowable interface for code in that directory; I don't know how practical > that is yet. > > Thoughts? Preferences? If it is only going to contains the signals stuff, gdb/signals/? As I mentioned before, I'm left wondering what "common" is in common with :-) GDB? sim? ... Andrew