From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10900 invoked by alias); 26 Apr 2008 16:42:01 -0000 Received: (qmail 10892 invoked by uid 22791); 26 Apr 2008 16:42:01 -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; Sat, 26 Apr 2008 16:41:39 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED1BC983DB; Sat, 26 Apr 2008 16:41:36 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (22.svnf5.xdsl.nauticom.net [209.195.183.55]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1B3898119; Sat, 26 Apr 2008 16:41:36 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1JpnSx-00020E-KT; Sat, 26 Apr 2008 12:41:35 -0400 Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2008 17:22:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Mark Kettenis Cc: vladimir@codesourcery.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFA] Report the main thread. Message-ID: <20080426164135.GA7682@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Mark Kettenis , vladimir@codesourcery.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <200804262005.18646.vladimir@codesourcery.com> <200804261617.m3QGH9dv027362@brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200804261617.m3QGH9dv027362@brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-12-11) 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: 2008-04/txt/msg00598.txt.bz2 On Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 06:17:09PM +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote: > > Presently, on Linux, we do add the main thread to the thread list, but we > > fail to report this new thread to outside world. I think we should not > > do any such special-casing -- if we want the =thread-created notification > > to be usable as replacement for getting the thread, we better emit that > > for all new thread. > > I disagree. The "main" thread is not a new thread, but has been there > all along. Users would be terribly confused you'd report some sort of > thread creation event here. Me too. We used to report this thread - since we did not detect it until later, when libthread_db initialized - and I deliberately left it silent when I fixed that. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery