From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18688 invoked by alias); 27 Jul 2004 15:28:27 -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 18679 invoked from network); 27 Jul 2004 15:28:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 27 Jul 2004 15:28:27 -0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i6RFSQe3026257 for ; Tue, 27 Jul 2004 11:28:27 -0400 Received: from localhost.redhat.com (porkchop.devel.redhat.com [172.16.58.2]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i6RFSQa09352; Tue, 27 Jul 2004 11:28:26 -0400 Received: from gnu.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DEF712B9D; Tue, 27 Jul 2004 11:28:22 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <41067496.6090403@gnu.org> Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2004 15:28:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-GB; rv:1.4.1) Gecko/20040217 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Michael Chastain Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, eliz@gnu.org Subject: Re: [rfa/PROBLEMS] document threads/1650, thread internal error References: <20040726154838.4E0E44B104@berman.michael-chastain.com> <410560B4.70207@gnu.org> <4105A2AA.nailMI62FIEAX@mindspring.com> In-Reply-To: <4105A2AA.nailMI62FIEAX@mindspring.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2004-07/txt/msg00399.txt.bz2 > Argh, I should have read to the end of my mailbox before committing > to gdb HEAD. > > >>> - that it is (to the best of our knowledge) GNU/Linux and LinuxThreads >>> specific > > > Good question, but your answer is wrong. Outch! > Looking at gdb-testers@ for > June and July, I see that hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.00 and > ia64-unknown-linux-gnu have this problem. Many other arches can't > compile manythreads.c so we can't tell either way. I thought HP/UX threads are pretty much busted anyway. Since it isn't a LinuxThreads / libthread_db system, I'd assume (with out strong evidence to the contrary) that the testsuite failure is due to a bug in the HP/UX code. >>> So the closing paragraph should make this clearer. Something like >>> ``This problem has not been observed on GNU/Linux systems that use NPTL >>> (New Posix Threads Library[?]). People still using linuxthreads are >>> strongly encouraged to migrate to NPTL''. > > > Shouldn't that be in NEWS? Maybe I've missed some discussion, > but it's news to me that users linuxthreads are encouraged to > switch. It's our workaround to a problem. >>> We should also mention that on GNU/Linux NPTL based systems a problem >>> with GDB loosing track of threads was fixed. > > > That sounds good. Andrew