From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27910 invoked by alias); 3 Jun 2004 18:28:07 -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 27903 invoked from network); 3 Jun 2004 18:28:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO smtp6.mindspring.com) (207.69.200.110) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 3 Jun 2004 18:28:06 -0000 Received: from user-119a90a.biz.mindspring.com ([66.149.36.10] helo=berman.michael-chastain.com) by smtp6.mindspring.com with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 1BVwwf-0007ES-00; Thu, 03 Jun 2004 14:28:05 -0400 Received: by berman.michael-chastain.com (Postfix, from userid 502) id D59554B104; Thu, 3 Jun 2004 14:28:04 -0400 (EDT) To: mec.gnu@mindspring.com, msnyder@redhat.com Subject: Re: [rfa/testsuite/threads] ping: manythreads.exp Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, jjohnstn@redhat.com Message-Id: <20040603182804.D59554B104@berman.michael-chastain.com> Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2004 18:28:00 -0000 From: mec.gnu@mindspring.com (Michael Elizabeth Chastain) X-SW-Source: 2004-06/txt/msg00058.txt.bz2 ms> So... this means it will unconditionally wait, right? ms> Can I assume that "after 1000" means milliseconds, not seconds? Yes, and yes. The "milliseconds" part is in the TCL book so it's okay to rely on it. ms> That's my only concern, that if it fails for some reason, it ms> will block for a long time. If that's not the case, then the ms> change is ok with me (if it's ok with Jeff). Hey Jeff -- is this okay with you? ms> Michael, I notice that the same idiom is used in pthreads.exp; ms> do you think your change would also be appropriate there, and ms> if so, would you mind making it? I think it would be good there too. Right now, the code says: sleep 1 set description "Stopped with a ^C" after 1000 [send_gdb "\003"] gdb_expect { ... } so the test script is going into the gdb_expect and pausing there until the 'after' block executes. There's no need to be running the send_gdb "\003" in parallel with gdb_expect. So I'll make a patch for this too. (Also it looks bizarre to use both 'sleep' and 'after' ... gotta do a little research). Michael C