From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 550 invoked by alias); 26 Sep 2006 03:56:16 -0000 Received: (qmail 542 invoked by uid 22791); 26 Sep 2006 03:56:15 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from nevyn.them.org (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31.1) with ESMTP; Tue, 26 Sep 2006 03:56:13 +0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.54) id 1GS43G-00089m-OQ for gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Mon, 25 Sep 2006 23:56:10 -0400 Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2006 03:56:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [RFC] Never silently discard internal errors Message-ID: <20060926035610.GA31294@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <20060925184223.GA15314@nevyn.them.org> <20060925200534.GB18759@nevyn.them.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) X-IsSubscribed: yes 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: 2006-09/txt/msg00184.txt.bz2 On Tue, Sep 26, 2006 at 06:29:12AM +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2006 16:05:34 -0400 > > From: Daniel Jacobowitz > > Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org > > > > I don't think we could start prompting on pipes; I'm sure it would > > break some things, probably including the emacs mode in question. > > Can you elaborate about the breakage? I don't know what would break for sure, but I imagine that code which has never before received any "(y or n)" prompts would not know what to do when it got one, for any operations it conducted on behalf of the user. This is the sort of thing that causes tests in the testsuite to time out. The other likely problem is with line buffering; output over a pipe is on many platforms block buffered rather than line buffered, and the prompts might fail to show up when they were needed. This is all speculation! Maybe it would just work, but it doesn't seem like a great change unless someone who thinks it's a good idea volunteers to test a bunch of different scenarios, and I'm not that interested in the issue, I'm afraid. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery