From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22865 invoked by alias); 10 Aug 2003 16:11:57 -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 22857 invoked from network); 10 Aug 2003 16:11:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO walton.kettenis.dyndns.org) (213.93.115.144) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 10 Aug 2003 16:11:54 -0000 Received: from elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org (elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org [192.168.0.2]) by walton.kettenis.dyndns.org (8.12.6p2/8.12.5) with ESMTP id h7AGBgbs002016; Sun, 10 Aug 2003 18:11:42 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from kettenis@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org) Received: from elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org (8.12.6p2/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h7AGBg3g058629; Sun, 10 Aug 2003 18:11:42 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from kettenis@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org) Received: (from kettenis@localhost) by elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org (8.12.6p2/8.12.6/Submit) id h7AGBfnh058626; Sun, 10 Aug 2003 18:11:41 +0200 (CEST) Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2003 16:11:00 -0000 Message-Id: <200308101611.h7AGBfnh058626@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org> From: Mark Kettenis To: drow@mvista.com CC: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, msnyder@redhat.com In-reply-to: <20030724184849.GC1842@nevyn.them.org> (message from Daniel Jacobowitz on Thu, 24 Jul 2003 14:48:49 -0400) Subject: Re: RFA: Actual support for tracing forks on GNU/Linux References: <20030618232942.GA982@nevyn.them.org> <20030628163444.GB9716@nevyn.them.org> <20030709215713.GA25331@nevyn.them.org> <20030724184849.GC1842@nevyn.them.org> X-SW-Source: 2003-08/txt/msg00154.txt.bz2 Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2003 14:48:49 -0400 From: Daniel Jacobowitz Ping. Sorry Daniel for not responding earlier. I've had almost no time to spend on hacking since the second half of june and I've just returned from a vacation in Finland. Anyway, I do have a few comments: * I'm not very enthousiastic about the staggering of CHILD_POST_STARTUP_INFERIOR and LINUX_CHILD_POST_STARTUP_INFERIOR, especially since it infects i386-nat.c. However, I'm pretty sure there isn't a better alternative that doesn't involve redisigning the target vector :-(. I'd appreciate though if you could stick in a comment somewhere that says this is really ugly. * The changes to lin-lwp.c seem pretty much OK to me. So I think this can go in. Mark