On Mon, 19 Dec 2011, peter green wrote:
On the issue of the R? definitions I proposed renaming them to REG_R?. The use of a REG_ prefix is consistent with x86, x64 and sparc (I couldn't find any comparable definitions at all on other architectures I looked at) I asked what the impact of this change would be on the aforementioned mailing lists and got the following reply from Konstantinos Margaritis
at worst the packages that had to be workaround on arm* for this, can have the workaround removed.
The most obvious users of these definitions would be (native) GDB and gdbserver - do those still build OK (i.e. include the correct headers to get the definitions they need and not rely on any definitions that were removed) after this patch?
Have you verified that it still works to include both <sys/ucontext.h> and <sys/procfs.h> in the same source file, in either order?