From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12736 invoked by alias); 17 Apr 2003 02:40:09 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 12726 invoked from network); 17 Apr 2003 02:40:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO crack.them.org) (65.125.64.184) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 17 Apr 2003 02:40:09 -0000 Received: from nevyn.them.org ([66.93.61.169] ident=mail) by crack.them.org with asmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 195zJu-0000sQ-00; Wed, 16 Apr 2003 21:40:14 -0500 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 195zJi-0002es-00; Wed, 16 Apr 2003 22:40:02 -0400 Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 02:40:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Joel Brobecker Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFA/testsuite] test hand function call in commands list Message-ID: <20030417024002.GA10172@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Joel Brobecker , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <20030414154048.GC1151@gnat.com> <20030416142321.GA7612@nevyn.them.org> <20030416230905.GH1241@gnat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030416230905.GH1241@gnat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i X-SW-Source: 2003-04/txt/msg00335.txt.bz2 On Wed, Apr 16, 2003 at 07:09:05PM -0400, Joel Brobecker wrote: > > No; let's figure out what the new problem is first. After that let's > > get the test in as quickly as possible so that we know if it breaks > > again :) > > Sure. > > > I can reproduce this. It's even simpler; we aren't executing the > > commands list even if if there's no inferior function call in them. > > This appears to be specific to commands on a breakpoint hit during an > > inferior function call. > > This is really bizarre. I do remember very clearly that removing the > "silent" command in the commands list caused the breakpoint number to > be printed. So it seemed that the commands where executed... Silent is handled separately from the rest of the commands list; it's handled when the breakpoint is hit, but the commands themselves run later. > > Did this ever work? > > Since Klee posted the patch, I was assuming that he had it working at > some point. I don't know if it was tested in the FSF tree. Although yes is probably a safe bet... -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer