[rfa/threads] Eliminate lin-lwp.c
Andrew Cagney
cagney@gnu.org
Thu Sep 16 20:12:00 GMT 2004
>>>>>> >>>You mean add a "lin-lwp.h" which exports everything so that
>>>>>> >>>"linux-nat.c" can construct that vector, or conversly have "linux-nat.h"
>>>>>> >>>export everything so that "lin-lwp.c" can construct the vector?
>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>> >>>Bleauh! Such a separation is artifical (although perhaphs the single
>>>>>> >>>file should be called inf-linux.[hc]).
>>>
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >Yes, that's what I meant. I'd like to preserve the revision history
>>>> >when possible.
>>
>>>
>>> The revision history or the existing files and their contents? The
>>> former is always available in CVS. The later, as I noted, is just an
>>> artifical separation that will complicate the objective of cleaning up
>>> this code.
>
>
> I find the ability to use cvs annotate and diff on a function extremely
> valuable, and you'll make that much more awkward if you move them
> around without a reason. I was asking if you had a reason to create
> this inconvenience.
Yes, I want to avoid any artifical organization that will complicate the
objective of cleaning up this code.
What we need to preserve is the accumulated knowledge of bugs and
mis-implemented features - we do that by extending our test infrastructure.
>>> I do see merit in creating an a new inf-linux.c (to be consistent with
>>> inf-ptrace, and inf-child), and I think I'll revise the patch to do that.
>
>
> Please don't. It's the native support for Linux. By GDB's existing
> conventions it ought to be linux-*.
linux-inf.c? inf-linux.c is equally (if not more) consistent with the
new inf-ptrace.c and inf-child.c.
Andrew
More information about the Gdb-patches
mailing list