Re: [try 2nd, patch] Move common macros to i386-dbg-reg.h

[Yao Qi <yao at codesourcery dot com>]

On 04/14/2011 01:05 AM, Joel Brobecker wrote:
>> "a fully featured native GDB replacement or a lightweight remote
>> protocol stub" is *not* related to this patch at all.  I am unable to do
>> such choice.  This patch (and other patches of mine in this area) is to
>> reduce source code duplication as much as possible.  No matter what
>> model we choose for gdbserver, this patch still makes sense, IMO.
> 
> It does, but before we do so, I think it's important to know how
> we are going to reduce this duplication. I haven't looked at the patch,
> so I can't comment on it, but I think we just need a plan of what and
> how we're going to avoid that.
> 

How do you think of a "plan" I posted
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2011-04/msg00202.html

How do think of this patch?  I copy the link here for you reference,
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2011-03/msg00648.html

-- 
Yao (éå)