From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28721 invoked by alias); 11 Nov 2011 12:56:02 -0000 Received: (qmail 28710 invoked by uid 22791); 11 Nov 2011 12:56:01 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,MSGID_FROM_MTA_HEADER,RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mtagate1.uk.ibm.com (HELO mtagate1.uk.ibm.com) (194.196.100.161) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 11 Nov 2011 12:55:47 +0000 Received: from d06nrmr1507.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06nrmr1507.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.38.233]) by mtagate1.uk.ibm.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id pABCtjNR021082 for ; Fri, 11 Nov 2011 12:55:45 GMT Received: from d06av02.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av02.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.37.228]) by d06nrmr1507.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id pABCtjU91835042 for ; Fri, 11 Nov 2011 12:55:45 GMT Received: from d06av02.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d06av02.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id pABCtihb015786 for ; Fri, 11 Nov 2011 05:55:45 -0700 Received: from tuxmaker.boeblingen.de.ibm.com (tuxmaker.boeblingen.de.ibm.com [9.152.85.9]) by d06av02.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVin) with SMTP id pABCthKg015721; Fri, 11 Nov 2011 05:55:43 -0700 Message-Id: <201111111255.pABCthKg015721@d06av02.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com> Received: by tuxmaker.boeblingen.de.ibm.com (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Fri, 11 Nov 2011 13:55:43 +0100 Subject: Re: RFC: don't set the pspace on ordinary breakpoints To: tromey@redhat.com (Tom Tromey) Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2011 12:56:00 -0000 From: "Ulrich Weigand" Cc: pedro@codesourcery.com (Pedro Alves), gdb-patches@sourceware.org In-Reply-To: from "Tom Tromey" at Nov 10, 2011 01:23:23 PM MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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: 2011-11/txt/msg00317.txt.bz2 Tom Tromey wrote: > Now I wonder whether also removing the loop from > enable_breakpoints_after_startup is advisable. It seems less problematic, > though. Ah, yes, I intended my comment to apply to both loops in the same way. The same reasons apply for the loop in enable_breakpoints_after_startup, and just for consistency and simplicity I'd prefer to remove that second loop as well ... Bye, Ulrich -- Dr. Ulrich Weigand GNU Toolchain for Linux on System z and Cell BE Ulrich.Weigand@de.ibm.com