From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25078 invoked by alias); 14 Dec 2010 15:04:52 -0000 Received: (qmail 25067 invoked by uid 22791); 14 Dec 2010 15:04:50 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.1 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; Tue, 14 Dec 2010 15:04:44 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 368952BABFF; Tue, 14 Dec 2010 10:04:43 -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 ioy9xm21voyr; Tue, 14 Dec 2010 10:04:43 -0500 (EST) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B11B62BABFB; Tue, 14 Dec 2010 10:04:42 -0500 (EST) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 76282145B58; Tue, 14 Dec 2010 16:04:30 +0100 (CET) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2010 15:04:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Tom Tromey Cc: Marc Khouzam , "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" Subject: Re: Assertion failure because of missing inferior Message-ID: <20101214150430.GV2596@adacore.com> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) 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: 2010-12/txt/msg00228.txt.bz2 > Marc> 2010-12-10 Marc Khouzam > Marc> * mi/mi-main.c (mi_cmd_remove_inferior): Don't delete current inferior. > Marc> (get_other_inferior): New. > > I think this is ok for the 7.2 branch, assuming Joel didn't do the > release already :) I'll wait for the go ahead from you guys - I get confused with the various emails... There is also a watchpoint-related patch (from Pedro) which Jan pointed out. It looks a little riskier than the typical patch, but it fixes crashes and has been in HEAD for 4 months now. So I suggested the possibility of maybe putting it in, if we don't know of any issue that this patch caused since putting it in HEAD.... -- Joel