From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 104947 invoked by alias); 22 Jan 2016 16:56:44 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 104936 invoked by uid 89); 22 Jan 2016 16:56:43 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=Hx-languages-length:322 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Fri, 22 Jan 2016 16:56:43 +0000 Received: from int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 281F83F3DB for ; Fri, 22 Jan 2016 16:56:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from host1.jankratochvil.net (ovpn-116-93.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.116.93]) by int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id u0MGuccB004208 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 22 Jan 2016 11:56:41 -0500 Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2016 16:56:00 -0000 From: Jan Kratochvil To: Pedro Alves Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH+doc] Fix PR threads/19422 - show which thread caused stop Message-ID: <20160122165638.GA21084@host1.jankratochvil.net> References: <1451950202-18024-1-git-send-email-palves@redhat.com> <5697ABE8.7060705@redhat.com> <20160122164429.GA28687@host1.jankratochvil.net> <56A25EEB.306@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <56A25EEB.306@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2016-01/txt/msg00574.txt.bz2 On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 17:55:07 +0100, Pedro Alves wrote: > Now watchpoint hits are consistent with all other breakpoints in that aspect: OK, that makes sense - so that it does not mess with the possible inferior output. Thanks for the explanation, Jan