Re: [RFA]: Fix for pending breakpoints in manually loaded/unloaded shlibs

[Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>]

On Wed, Aug 11, 2004 at 06:19:07PM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> >>I'm currently investigating gdb.threads/static.exp failures and to fix 
> >>>that I think I'll need to add a further observer event.
> >
> >
> >Really?
> 
> Really?
> 
> > I think thread-db needs to try to initialize at two points:
> >whenever a new shared library is loaded (converting the objfile hook to
> >an observer would be nice, but independent) and whenever an inferior is
> >created (conveniently we've got an observer for this already).
> 
> Think PIE.

I am, in fact, thinking about pie.  Oh, you mean PIE...

> For our purposes, both new executable loaded and new shlib loaded are 
> the same event - there's been an objfile_loaded event.  There's no 
> reason to differentiate them.
> 
> The new inferior event is orthogonal, and far more low level.

I don't see how "new inferior" is any lower level than "new object".
In any case, thread-db wants to initialize when these two conditions
are true:
  (A) The inferior is running
and
  (B) The thread library has been loaded

So using an inferior created hook makes perfect sense to me...

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz