From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11635 invoked by alias); 2 Mar 2009 17:23:16 -0000 Received: (qmail 11599 invoked by uid 22791); 2 Mar 2009 17:23:15 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 17:23:10 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A32B2BAB33; Mon, 2 Mar 2009 12:23:11 -0500 (EST) Received: from rock.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rock.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id iboSfwjuvpu0; Mon, 2 Mar 2009 12:23:11 -0500 (EST) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 162DD2BAB3F; Mon, 2 Mar 2009 12:23:11 -0500 (EST) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 041B5E7ACD; Mon, 2 Mar 2009 09:23:05 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2009 17:23:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Oswald Buddenhagen Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: make attaching to stopped processes work under windows Message-ID: <20090302172305.GK26056@adacore.com> References: <20090226192552.GB15958@troll08.nokia.trolltech.de> <20090228004414.GA21767@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> <20090302100651.GA8157@troll08.nokia.trolltech.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090302100651.GA8157@troll08.nokia.trolltech.de> 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: 2009-03/txt/msg00014.txt.bz2 > > Suspending random threads like this is usually a bad idea. Do you > > actually have a use cause that requires attaching to suspended threads? > > > i should point out that the patch contains a comment answering that > question and that i pointed that out in the only sentence the mail > contained. so please be a little bit more attentive, or make it somewhat > clearer that you already are (by relating to previous content when you > ask something). thanks. Please, let's remain courteous. Chris is not your employee, he is a volunteer who maintains, among other things, the Windows ports of GDB. We're all have very busy lives, and finding time to review patches is sometimes difficult. As far as I am concerned, if I question the purpose of a patch, why would I waste time looking at the patch itself? -- Joel