From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13244 invoked by alias); 5 Sep 2007 02:04:05 -0000 Received: (qmail 12984 invoked by uid 22791); 5 Sep 2007 02:04:02 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from NaN.false.org (HELO nan.false.org) (208.75.86.248) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Wed, 05 Sep 2007 02:03:53 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C7B1A982A2; Wed, 5 Sep 2007 02:03:53 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (22.svnf5.xdsl.nauticom.net [209.195.183.55]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD3CA9810A; Wed, 5 Sep 2007 02:03:53 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1ISkFC-0005wY-Q4; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 22:03:50 -0400 Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2007 02:04:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Luis Machado Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [patch 0/1] Threaded Watchpoints Message-ID: <20070905020350.GA10025@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Luis Machado , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <1187013078.4346.9.camel@localhost> <1187631217.11176.8.camel@localhost> <1187631568.11176.11.camel@localhost> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1187631568.11176.11.camel@localhost> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.15 (2007-04-09) 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: 2007-09/txt/msg00067.txt.bz2 On Mon, Aug 20, 2007 at 02:39:28PM -0300, Luis Machado wrote: > OK, i messed up the last patch, it appears to be an older version. > Follows the correct one. Hi Luis, I just wanted to let you know this hasn't been forgotten. There are a couple of problems with this submission, and I'm working on a new version of it. The problem that made me take another try is that when we last discussed the patch we eventually concluded that this was a bad (and avoidable) use of observers. The problem that's giving me a headache is I can't work out what a lot of the independent parts of this patch are supposed to do... I'll be in touch, hopefully in the next few days. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery