This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the GDB project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

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

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.


On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 2:54 PM, Yao Qi <> wrote:
> On 06/18/2012 05:08 PM, oza Pawandeep wrote:
>> diff -urN orig/configure.tgt new/configure.tgt
>> --- orig/configure.tgt    Â2012-06-18 12:36:47.274501400 +0530
>> +++ new/configure.tgt 2012-06-18 12:31:47.335501400 +0530
>> @@ -76,7 +76,7 @@
>> Âarm*-*-linux*)
>> Â Â Â # Target: ARM based machine running GNU/Linux
>> Â Â Â gdb_target_obs="arm-tdep.o arm-linux-tdep.o glibc-tdep.o \
>> - Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â solib-svr4.o symfile-mem.o linux-tdep.o"
>> + Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â solib-svr4.o symfile-mem.o linux-tdep.o linux-record.o"
>> Â Â Â build_gdbserver=yes
>> Â Â Â ;;
>> Âarm*-*-netbsd* | arm*-*-knetbsd*-gnu)
>> ok to check in ?
> It is not good to post the same change twice in different mails. ÂThis
> change makes no sense until your 'arm-syscall record' patch is approved.
> ÂI noticed that this change has been included in your 'arm-syscall
> record' patch, so I think patch here doesn't have to reviewed.
> --
> Yao (éå)

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]