Re: [patch/ob] not_a_breakpoint -> not_a_sw_breakpoint

[Andrew Cagney <ac131313@ges.redhat.com>]

 > Great.  I'm going to have to think about this a little more though; if
 > you look in infrun.c you'll see that this parameter sometimes comes
 > from catchpoints, which is unfortunate since we have nowhere that
 > indicates whether a catchpoint is affected by DECR_PC_AFTER_BREAK or
 > not.

See my e-mail to Kevin.  it decides if 
DECR_PC_AFTER_[SOFTWARE_]BREAK[POINT_TRAP] should be applied.

 > (For i386/Linux, when I'm done with it, I believe that throw and catch
 > catchpoints WILL be affected by decr_pc_after_break.... and that
 > fork/exec/vfork catchpoints WON'T be.  I had to hack around this in my
 > work tree.)

Are throw/catch events implemented using software breakpoints that are 
entered into the breakpoint table?

One of the characteristics of the software single step breakpoints is 
that they are not entered into the breakpoint table.  This is why Joel 
needs to hide them from core GDB :-)

I think fork/exec events can be treated separatly.

enjoy,
Andrew