This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [rfa] gdbserver 2/n - signals
>> Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2001 08:32:49 -0700
>> From: Daniel Jacobowitz <dmj+@andrew.cmu.edu>
>
>> >
>> > I don't really understand the rationale for this change. This is a
>> > user's manual; why should it matter to a user to know the name of the
>> > enum which defines signal numbers? I don't see how it makes the issue
>> > better defined (since you removed the ``poorly defined'' phrase).
>> >
>> > If we do want to leave the `enum target_signal' info in the manual, at
>> > the very least please say what source file is that defined on.
>
>>
>> Well, the way I see it is that the signal numbering convention is part
>> of the remote protocol, and so should be documented in the manual; at
>> the same time I didn't really want to duplicate the hundred and
>> something signals inline in the texinfo documentation.
>
>
> Then perhaps this info shouldn't be in the manual.
Something needs to be documented - a recent question on the bug-gdb list
about those exact values confirms this.
Perhaphs list the values that GDB treats as significant - $SIGNONE,
$SIGBREAK, $SIGINT and a reference to the file.
Andrew