From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22119 invoked by alias); 19 Feb 2003 17:19:47 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 22112 invoked from network); 19 Feb 2003 17:19:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (172.16.49.200) by 172.16.49.205 with SMTP; 19 Feb 2003 17:19:47 -0000 Received: from redhat.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E23EE2E96; Wed, 19 Feb 2003 12:24:32 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <3E53BDD0.70601@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 17:19:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20030217 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Daniel Jacobowitz Cc: Elena Zannoni , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFC] PTRACE_ATTACH problem on new Linux kernels References: <15953.34032.985446.344226@localhost.redhat.com> <20030218022401.14C7E3CF3@localhost.redhat.com> <20030218031431.GA31807@nevyn.them.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2003-02/txt/msg00419.txt.bz2 > But Roland made a very convincing case for this new behavior; for > programs like strace which just pass all signals through, this prevents > SIGSTOPs being silently cancelled, which is a definite plus. Er, humor me. Does it work? GDB's problem was that it would pass down the sigstop and then promptly get it back again (via wait?). Wouldn't strace suffer the same problem? Unless the sigstop really is delivered that is. Andrew