From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25705 invoked by alias); 8 Jun 2009 23:16:03 -0000 Received: (qmail 25697 invoked by uid 22791); 8 Jun 2009 23:16:03 -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; Mon, 08 Jun 2009 23:15:57 +0000 Received: (qmail 23822 invoked from network); 8 Jun 2009 23:15:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO orlando.local) (pedro@127.0.0.2) by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 8 Jun 2009 23:15:55 -0000 From: Pedro Alves To: Tom Tromey Subject: Re: Move the multi-forks support to the generic multi-inferiors support. Date: Mon, 08 Jun 2009 23:16:00 -0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.10 Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <200905310013.38916.pedro@codesourcery.com> <200906061707.21594.pedro@codesourcery.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200906090017.01168.pedro@codesourcery.com> 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: 2009-06/txt/msg00195.txt.bz2 On Monday 08 June 2009 23:37:12, Tom Tromey wrote: > Pedro> (I was a bit surprised to (re-)find that MI doesn't use > Pedro> print_inferior) > > Naughty. Though at a quick glance I didn't see where MI does any > printing of the inferiors...? It's in the -list-thread-groups command (mi_cmd_list_thread_groups/print_one_inferior). > In this case I think the patch is ok anyway -- an error in "info > threads" does not, IMO, imply that we should propagate the mistake to > other commands. Let me know what you think of this, I won't install > the patch if you feel differently. No, I agree with you. My only concern is that the PID column may end up being the wrong name for the target-id, due to targets that don't have a real notion of PID. I was planning of making that column's value print something like target_pid_to_str (pid_to_ptid (PID)), just like the corresponding column in info threads. I was hoping that when we'd get to name the columns in "info threads" we'd come up with a nice name for it. :-) -- Pedro Alves