From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11286 invoked by alias); 28 Nov 2006 17:15:08 -0000 Received: (qmail 9564 invoked by uid 22791); 28 Nov 2006 17:14:39 -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, 28 Nov 2006 17:14:35 +0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1Gp6XO-0005wQ-2W; Tue, 28 Nov 2006 12:14:30 -0500 Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 17:15:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: "H. J. Lu" Cc: GDB , 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: <20061128171430.GE21834@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: "H. J. Lu" , GDB , bug-readline@gnu.org, chet.ramey@case.edu References: <20061121213205.GA13310@lucon.org> <20061128164658.GB20882@nevyn.them.org> <20061128165844.GA13667@lucon.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20061128165844.GA13667@lucon.org> 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-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-11/txt/msg00327.txt.bz2 On Tue, Nov 28, 2006 at 08:58:44AM -0800, H. J. Lu wrote: > 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 I don't think it's right because it's messing around with the internals of readline from GDB. If it's applied to readline that's an entirely different story; then it looks like a fine fix. With the version Jan sent to bug-readline, I worry that readline and GDB will get confused if we longjmp out of the readline handler; you can make that happen by typing: (gdb) define foo > -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery