From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3810 invoked by alias); 30 Nov 2010 05:15:54 -0000 Received: (qmail 3784 invoked by uid 22791); 30 Nov 2010 05:15:51 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 30 Nov 2010 05:15:46 +0000 Received: from int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.25]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id oAU5FiMa001153 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Tue, 30 Nov 2010 00:15:45 -0500 Received: from mesquite.lan ([10.3.113.8]) by int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id oAU5Fihc015054 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Tue, 30 Nov 2010 00:15:44 -0500 Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2010 05:15:00 -0000 From: Kevin Buettner To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [RFC] Limit attempts to place breakpoints on _start, __start, and main in solib-svr4.c Message-ID: <20101129221544.21e6eab1@mesquite.lan> In-Reply-To: <20101130000707.GA26969@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> References: <20101129160233.1265d555@mesquite.lan> <20101130000707.GA26969@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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: 2010-11/txt/msg00495.txt.bz2 Hi Jan, On Tue, 30 Nov 2010 01:07:07 +0100 Jan Kratochvil wrote: > I haven't tried it myself but is there a reason why not to use > `struct inferior->attach_flag' instead? I'll look into using `attach_flag' and let you know... Thanks! Kevin