From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-79316-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 30120 invoked by alias); 7 Mar 2011 09:22:38 -0000
Received: (qmail 30111 invoked by uid 22791); 7 Mar 2011 09:22:37 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.0 required=5.0	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from sibelius.xs4all.nl (HELO glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl) (83.163.83.176)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 07 Mar 2011 09:22:28 +0000
Received: from glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl (kettenis@localhost [127.0.0.1])	by glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p279KjNI017999;	Mon, 7 Mar 2011 10:20:45 +0100 (CET)
Received: (from kettenis@localhost)	by glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) id p279KhVO031798;	Mon, 7 Mar 2011 10:20:43 +0100 (CET)
Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2011 09:49:00 -0000
Message-Id: <201103070920.p279KhVO031798@glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl>
From: Mark Kettenis <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl>
To: brobecker@adacore.com
CC: pedro@codesourcery.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org
In-reply-to: <20110307043923.GN30306@adacore.com> (message from Joel Brobecker	on Mon, 7 Mar 2011 08:39:23 +0400)
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fix spurious FAIL in py-inferior.exp (x86-solaris)
References: <1299238268-32142-1-git-send-email-brobecker@adacore.com> <201103041218.p24CI1vS028257@glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <201103041227.04761.pedro@codesourcery.com> <20110307043923.GN30306@adacore.com>
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: 2011-03/txt/msg00429.txt.bz2

> Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2011 08:39:23 +0400
> From: Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com>
> 
> > On Friday 04 March 2011 12:18:01, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> > > That's a bug in the Solaris thread support. So...
> > 
> > It's by design.   Consequence of the M:N support, IIRC.
> > (I didn't design it!)
> 
> So, are we OK with this patch?

Not really.  Solaris has not been using a M:N for quite some time now.
And I think GDB should present threads in a consistent way.