Re: MI solib notification

[Vladimir Prus <vladimir@codesourcery.com>]

On Thursday 12 February 2009 22:58:37 Tom Tromey wrote:
> >>>>> "Daniel" == Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org> writes:
> 
> Daniel> I agree with your rationale.  I almost suggested we push the aout
> Daniel> check down into disable_breakpoints_in_unloaded_shlib... what do you
> Daniel> think?
> 
> It sounds reasonable to me.
> Pedro also suggested this... great minds :-)

Can you write down the comment that disable_breakpoints_in_unloaded_shlib
would have to contain to explain all this? ;-) I assume it will go like this:

	Don't emit any message here for a.out, because for all the other
	targets some other code calls some other function that arranges for
	this message to not be printed when rerunning the program...

In other words, the problem with checking for a.out is that it deeply depends on
intricate details of some other code. I think disable_breakpoints_in_unloaded_shlib
can either do:

	1. Check for target_has_execution or similar
	2. Check for a new parameter to the observer, like 'mass_murder'

- Volodya


	

> 
> Tom
>