From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 31244 invoked by alias); 28 Nov 2006 17:09:39 -0000 Received: (qmail 9829 invoked by uid 22791); 28 Nov 2006 16:59:07 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from smtp106.sbc.mail.mud.yahoo.com (HELO smtp106.sbc.mail.mud.yahoo.com) (68.142.198.205) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with SMTP; Tue, 28 Nov 2006 16:58:50 +0000 Received: (qmail 27415 invoked from network); 28 Nov 2006 16:58:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lucon.org) (hjjean@sbcglobal.net@75.0.162.249 with login) by smtp106.sbc.mail.mud.yahoo.com with SMTP; 28 Nov 2006 16:58:46 -0000 X-YMail-OSG: 7kmqArEVM1lUQOXpj.e6FFr2gtx6pjCZdaF4fbYwyRNR8FQO0VY3kSr52FifaVhCUj_DCJYuz6_5QHXy0N.LHll.5bdoGhxJaidaemHVp0B37hgbTF9yGA-- Received: by lucon.org (Postfix, from userid 500) id C453846EEEC; Tue, 28 Nov 2006 08:58:44 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 17:09:00 -0000 From: "H. J. Lu" To: GDB Cc: bug-readline@gnu.org, chet.ramey@case.edu Subject: Re: PATCH: PR tui/2173: Arrow keys no longer works in breakpoint command list Message-ID: <20061128165844.GA13667@lucon.org> References: <20061121213205.GA13310@lucon.org> <20061128164658.GB20882@nevyn.them.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20061128164658.GB20882@nevyn.them.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-11/txt/msg00322.txt.bz2 On Tue, Nov 28, 2006 at 11:46:58AM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > On Tue, Nov 21, 2006 at 01:32:05PM -0800, H. J. Lu wrote: > > The problem is callback in readline 5.1 is changed. When gdb readline > > callback calls readline (), readline is really confused since although > > it is called from gdb callback, it isn't really in callback state. This > > kludge seems to work for me. > > I'm pretty sure this isn't right. I got as far as figuring out that we > should be calling rl_callback_handler_install and > rl_callback_handler_remove at different times, always removing the > handler before calling readline recursively, but I couldn't quite work > out the right conditions. I assume by "this isn't right", you mean my patch may break something. Do you have a testcase? It may get into readline: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-readline/2006-11/msg00011.html H.J.