From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-63434-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 5585 invoked by alias); 30 Apr 2009 22:16:18 -0000
Received: (qmail 5576 invoked by uid 22791); 30 Apr 2009 22:16:17 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.4 required=5.0 	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from mail.codesourcery.com (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (65.74.133.4)     by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 30 Apr 2009 22:16:13 +0000
Received: (qmail 13869 invoked from network); 30 Apr 2009 22:16:10 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO orlando) (pedro@127.0.0.2)   by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 30 Apr 2009 22:16:10 -0000
From: Pedro Alves <pedro@codesourcery.com>
To: Doug Evans <dje@google.com>
Subject: Re: [RFA] Don't kill inferior if there's a typo in the specified  port.
Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2009 22:16:00 -0000
User-Agent: KMail/1.9.10
Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
References: <20090410231814.40469846AB@localhost> <e394668d0904131149q3dd7bd64jd1606c9388fadc1e@mail.gmail.com> <e394668d0904301451q3b23dc91yfec9f428b537a2ba@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <e394668d0904301451q3b23dc91yfec9f428b537a2ba@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;   charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200904302316.23307.pedro@codesourcery.com>
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb-patches.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2009-04/txt/msg00828.txt.bz2

On Thursday 30 April 2009 22:51:27, Doug Evans wrote:

> >>> Ok to check in?
> >>
> >> This is fine with me. =A0Let's give it a few days in case Daniel or
> >> others want to comment.
> >>
> >> Thanks for documenting detach_or_kill_inferior_callback, btw ;-).
> >>
> >> --
> >> Pedro Alves
> >>
> >

> Ok to check this in?

Eh, I thought we had already settled.  :-)

> It does
>=20
> Killing process(es) PID1, PID2, PID3, PID4, PIDnn.
> Detaching process(es) PID1, PID2, PID3, PID4, PIDnn.
>=20
> though I removed the commas for simplicity.
> [I'm proactively avoiding some of the issues being raised. :-)]

It looks fine to me.  Please go ahead before someone has a
different idea.  :-)  Thanks!

--=20
Pedro Alves