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: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 14:52:37 -0700
> From: Daniel Jacobowitz <dmj+@andrew.cmu.edu>
>
> 2001-07-19 Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com>
>
> * gdb.texinfo (Protocol): Mention that signal numbers
> are defined by the target_signal enum.
>
> Index: gdb.texinfo
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/doc/gdb.texinfo,v
> retrieving revision 1.44
> diff -u -r1.44 gdb.texinfo
> --- gdb.texinfo 2001/07/06 04:07:29 1.44
> +++ gdb.texinfo 2001/07/19 18:56:55
> @@ -10211,8 +10211,8 @@
> receive any of the below as a reply. In the case of the @samp{C},
> @samp{c}, @samp{S} and @samp{s} packets, that reply is only returned
> when the target halts. In the below the exact meaning of @samp{signal
> -number} is poorly defined. In general one of the UNIX signal numbering
> -conventions is used.
> +number} is defined by the type @code{enum target_signal}. For the most
> +common signals this corresponds to the UNIX signal numbering conventions.
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.