RE: [RFC/PATCH] Add new internal variable $_signo

["Pierre Muller" <pierre dot muller at ics-cnrs dot unistra dot fr>]

  Is it that I didn't understand the patch correctly or
do you use the GDB signal number in infrun.c
while you use the native signal integer value in the
corelow.c case?

  
  Aren't those two values sometimes different?
Wouldn't it be more consistent to only use the GDB internal number?

  In fact, this "inconsistency" is not specific to your patch,
the siggy from corelow.c is printed out, while other signals are always 
first converted to GDB enum values before being printed (and apparently not
in
integer form but using the gdb_signal_to_name function.

  Shouldn't we use gdb_signal_to_name (sig) in core_open
and set $_signo also to sig?

Pierre

Proposed patch (untested...)
Should I submit it independently or 
is there a specific reason to print the numeric value of the signal 
for core dumps while we seem to use signal names elsewhere?


2013-06-14  Pierre Muller  <muller@sourceware.org>

        * corelow.c (core_open): Use GDB signal name instead of raw
        signal value.

Index: corelow.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/corelow.c,v
retrieving revision 1.132
diff -u -p -r1.132 corelow.c
--- corelow.c   15 May 2013 12:26:14 -0000      1.132
+++ corelow.c   14 Jun 2013 08:56:08 -0000
@@ -445,7 +445,7 @@ core_open (char *filename, int from_tty)
                             : gdb_signal_from_host (siggy));

       printf_filtered (_("Program terminated with signal %s, %s.\n"),
-                      siggy, gdb_signal_to_string (sig));
+                      gdb_signal_to_name (sig), gdb_signal_to_string
(sig));
     }

   /* Fetch all registers from core file.  */