Re: record mode supposed to work on x86_64-linux?

[Hui Zhu <teawater at gmail dot com>]

Thank you very much Pedro and Andi.

I changed the changelog to:
2009-05-17  Hui Zhu  <teawater@gmail.com>

	* i386-tdep.c (i386_process_record): Make it extern.
	(i386_gdbarch_init): Don't call set_gdbarch_process_record
	here.
	* i386-tdep.c (i386_process_record): Declare.
	* i386-linux-tdep.c (i386_linux_init_abi): Call
	set_gdbarch_process_record.

And checked-in.

Hui

On Sun, May 17, 2009 at 19:52, Pedro Alves <pedro@codesourcery.com> wrote:
> On Sunday 17 May 2009 01:15:00, Hui Zhu wrote:
>> Hi Pedro,
>>
>> What do you think about this one?
>
> I think it's good, thanks.
>
>> 2009-05-17 ?Hui Zhu ?<teawater@gmail.com>
>>
>> ? ? ? ? * i386-tdep.c (i386_process_record): Remove the static of it.
>> ? ? ? ? (i386_gdbarch_init): Remove the set_gdbarch_process_record.
>> ? ? ? ? * i386-tdep.c (i386_process_record): New extern.
>> ? ? ? ? * i386-linux-tdep.c (i386_linux_init_abi): Call
>> ? ? ? ? set_gdbarch_process_record.
>
> Please consider the alternative ChangeLog suggestions below instead.
>
>> ? ? ? * i386-tdep.c (i386_process_record): Remove the static of it.
>
> ? ? ? ?* i386-tdep.c (i386_process_record): Make it extern.
>
>> ? ? ? (i386_gdbarch_init): Remove the set_gdbarch_process_record.
>
> From this entry, it isn't clear what you're removing. ?Actually, it
> sounds like you're removing the function implementation. ?Consider
> instead:
>
> ? ? ? ?(i386_gdbarch_init): Remove the set_gdbarch_process_record call.
> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ^^^^
>
> or even:
>
> ? ? ? ?(i386_gdbarch_init): Don't call set_gdbarch_process_record here.
>
>
>> ? ? ? * i386-tdep.c (i386_process_record): New extern.
>
> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?^ typo
>
> ? ? ? ?* i386-tdep.h (i386_process_record): Declare.
>
> (`new extern' sounds like adding a new variable or function,
> but you're just changing the linkage of an existing function.)
>
> --
> Pedro Alves
>