This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [RFA] Unified watchpoints for x86 platforms
- To: eliz at is dot elta dot co dot il
- Subject: Re: [RFA] Unified watchpoints for x86 platforms
- From: Mark Kettenis <kettenis at wins dot uva dot nl>
- Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 00:06:15 +0100
- CC: gdb-patches at sources dot redhat dot com
- References: <Pine.SUN.3.91.1010318105507.11615B-100000@is>
Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2001 10:56:25 +0200 (IST)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@is.elta.co.il>
On Sat, 17 Mar 2001, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> ... config/i386/nm-i386v.h is really for System V-ish systems only,
> and not a generic i386 file (the comment on the first line of that
> file is a misleading).
Not only is the comment misleading, but it looks like all the x86
targets include nm-i386v.h, so it is definitely used like a generic
i386 file!
What makes you think that? I see:
$ grep nm-i386v.h config/i386/*.h
config/i386/nm-go32.h:#include "i386/nm-i386v.h"
config/i386/nm-linux.h:#include "i386/nm-i386v.h"
Linux is a bit System V-ish, but DJGPP most certainly isn't, and in
principle it shouldn't include nm-i386v.h. None of the other x86
targets include nm-i386v.h.
> Therefore I think it's best to create a new config/i386/nm-i386.h
> file and put your stuff there instead.
Should I make nm-i386v.h include nm-i386.h, then?
I don't think so.
Mark