From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14653 invoked by alias); 11 Aug 2004 22:19:17 -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 14642 invoked from network); 11 Aug 2004 22:19:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 11 Aug 2004 22:19:16 -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 i7BMJFe3017550 for ; Wed, 11 Aug 2004 18:19:16 -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 i7BMJDa25013; Wed, 11 Aug 2004 18:19:13 -0400 Received: from gnu.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B78C52B9D; Wed, 11 Aug 2004 18:19:07 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <411A9B5B.1080108@gnu.org> Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 22:19:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-GB; rv:1.4.1) Gecko/20040801 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Daniel Jacobowitz Cc: Eli Zaretskii , jjohnstn@redhat.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFA]: Fix for pending breakpoints in manually loaded/unloaded shlibs References: <41191D71.60204@redhat.com> <7494-Wed11Aug2004070352+0300-eliz@gnu.org> <411A4209.6020801@redhat.com> <411A5012.3000508@gnu.org> <9743-Wed11Aug2004205531+0300-eliz@gnu.org> <411A84B0.7020106@gnu.org> <20040811204658.GA7231@nevyn.them.org> In-Reply-To: <20040811204658.GA7231@nevyn.them.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2004-08/txt/msg00414.txt.bz2 >>I'm currently investigating gdb.threads/static.exp failures and to fix >>> that I think I'll need to add a further observer event. > > > Really? Really? > I think thread-db needs to try to initialize at two points: > whenever a new shared library is loaded (converting the objfile hook to > an observer would be nice, but independent) and whenever an inferior is > created (conveniently we've got an observer for this already). Think PIE. For our purposes, both new executable loaded and new shlib loaded are the same event - there's been an objfile_loaded event. There's no reason to differentiate them. The new inferior event is orthogonal, and far more low level. Andrew (Of course this lets us eliminate one of the deprecated hooks)