From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10218 invoked by alias); 14 Jan 2006 15:56:52 -0000 Received: (qmail 10201 invoked by uid 22791); 14 Jan 2006 15:56:52 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from sibelius.xs4all.nl (HELO sibelius.xs4all.nl) (82.92.89.47) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Sat, 14 Jan 2006 15:56:49 +0000 Received: from elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl (root@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl [192.168.0.2]) by sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k0EFuCpJ026673; Sat, 14 Jan 2006 16:56:12 +0100 (CET) Received: from elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl (kettenis@localhost.sibelius.xs4all.nl [127.0.0.1]) by elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.13.4/8.13.3) with ESMTP id k0EFuBr9001471; Sat, 14 Jan 2006 16:56:12 +0100 (CET) Received: (from kettenis@localhost) by elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.13.4/8.13.4/Submit) id k0EFuBJ4000892; Sat, 14 Jan 2006 16:56:11 +0100 (CET) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 15:56:00 -0000 Message-Id: <200601141556.k0EFuBJ4000892@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> From: Mark Kettenis To: drow@false.org CC: andrew.stubbs@st.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com In-reply-to: <20060114154553.GA12028@nevyn.them.org> (message from Daniel Jacobowitz on Sat, 14 Jan 2006 10:45:53 -0500) Subject: Re: [PATCH] Disable thread specific breakpoints when thread dies References: <20051113184515.GG3599@nevyn.them.org> <437875B0.4000007@st.com> <20051114155659.GA25717@nevyn.them.org> <437A19DE.6040905@st.com> <437B47A1.4040705@st.com> <20051117034811.GB3057@nevyn.them.org> <437CA66B.9060201@st.com> <20060112162659.GA16141@nevyn.them.org> <43C7E466.9080703@st.com> <200601132011.k0DKBZ8w006107@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <20060114154553.GA12028@nevyn.them.org> Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-01/txt/msg00156.txt.bz2 > Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 10:45:53 -0500 > From: Daniel Jacobowitz > > > > I am happy, therefore, that the attached patch, with valid_thread_id(), > > > is correct, and will work once this other problem has been solved (or if > > > the user types 'info threads'). > > > > > > OK to commit? > > > > Sorry, but I don't think we should commit a patch that's just papering > > over some other more serious problem, perhaps perhaps if there's some > > pressing need to do so. > > Sorry about the confusion here - Mark, the patch Andrew posted is not a > workaround, but exactly the opposite. It's a correct patch that ought > to work, but doesn't because of a different bug, that he has > volunteered to track down next week. > > With that clarified, do you have any objection to the patch? Of course not. Mark