[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Restore GNU/Hurd functionality

From: Pedro Alves
Subject: Re: Restore GNU/Hurd functionality
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2009 16:14:47 +0100
User-agent: KMail/1.9.10

On Monday 20 July 2009 15:53:34, Thomas Schwinge wrote:

> Well, thanks to you for helping with maintining GDB's Hurd port!  If you
> need help with a new Hurd image, or want shell access to a system
> (<http://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/public_hurd_boxen.html>), please just
> speak up.  (Likewise everyone else who is interested, of course!)

Cool!  I just might.

> Whether it is better to do it the old way ( have a nested function
> attach_to_child that will be passed to and called from within
> fork_inferior), or do it like your patch does (inline the former
> attach_to_child to be executed after fork_inferior has returned) -- I
> have no idea, so I'll leave that to you.

Yeah.  I needed to pass the target_ops argument to
attach_to_child, since gnu_ops is now gone.  This way was simpler,
as it avoids having to change the callback's interface.  That callback
used to make sense when fork_inferior did some extra
work after calling it, and before returning; but, fork_inferior
doesn't do that anymore, it just calls the callback and returns.

We've done the same change to inf-ptrace.c recently-ish
(inlined the corresponding function when we needed the extra
argument, instead of changing the callback's interface).

> > +/* Create a prototype generic GNU/Hurd target.  The client can
> > +   override it with local methods.  */
> > +
> > +struct target_ops *
> > +gnu_target (void)
> > +{
> > +  struct target_ops *t = inf_child_target ();
> That one needs ``#include "inf-child.h"''.


> > +  t->to_can_run = gnu_can_run;
> This statement should be removed: the default value (as set by
> inf_child_target) is alright and you removed gnu_can_run just above.


> > +  t->to_thread_alive = gnu_thread_alive;
> > +  t->to_pid_to_str = gnu_pid_to_str;
> > +  t->to_stop = gnu_stop;
> > +}
> ``return t;'' is missing.


Thanks.  I'll commit the patch in a bit.

Pedro Alves

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]