From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25280 invoked by alias); 12 Oct 2006 10:45:30 -0000 Received: (qmail 25270 invoked by uid 22791); 12 Oct 2006 10:45:30 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from fra-del-04.spheriq.net (HELO fra-del-04.spheriq.net) (195.46.51.100) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Thu, 12 Oct 2006 10:45:23 +0000 Received: from fra-out-03.spheriq.net (fra-out-03.spheriq.net [195.46.51.131]) by fra-del-04.spheriq.net with ESMTP id k9CAjKIQ029407 for ; Thu, 12 Oct 2006 10:45:20 GMT Received: from fra-cus-02.spheriq.net (fra-cus-02.spheriq.net [195.46.51.38]) by fra-out-03.spheriq.net with ESMTP id k9CAjJWj019903 for ; Thu, 12 Oct 2006 10:45:20 GMT Received: from beta.dmz-eu.st.com (beta.dmz-eu.st.com [164.129.1.35]) by fra-cus-02.spheriq.net with ESMTP id k9CAjITf027134 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=OK); Thu, 12 Oct 2006 10:45:19 GMT Received: from zeta.dmz-eu.st.com (ns2.st.com [164.129.230.9]) by beta.dmz-eu.st.com (STMicroelectronics) with ESMTP id 83971DA4B; Thu, 12 Oct 2006 10:45:08 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail1.bri.st.com (mail1.bri.st.com [164.129.8.218]) by zeta.dmz-eu.st.com (STMicroelectronics) with ESMTP id 8AB6447365; Thu, 12 Oct 2006 10:44:01 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [164.129.15.13] (bri1043.bri.st.com [164.129.15.13]) by mail1.bri.st.com (MOS 3.5.8-GR) with ESMTP id CIC31412 (AUTH stubbsa); Thu, 12 Oct 2006 11:44:00 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: <452E1C70.3090101@st.com> Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2006 10:45:00 -0000 From: Andrew STUBBS User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.7 (Windows/20060909) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mark Kettenis Cc: drow@false.org, gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Don't give spurious warnings when using thread specific breakpoints References: <452CF534.4060209@st.com> <20061011135545.GA26060@nevyn.them.org> <200610112206.k9BM68ml030875@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> In-Reply-To: <200610112206.k9BM68ml030875@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-10/txt/msg00138.txt.bz2 Mark Kettenis wrote: >> (gdb) b main if 1 >> Breakpoint 1 at 0x439ee0 >> (gdb) b main if 2 >> Note: breakpoint 1 also set at pc 0x439ee0. >> Breakpoint 2 at 0x439ee0 >> >> If that's right, why is similar for threads wrong? That's just a >> different condition. And the wording is such that it's perfectly >> correct. > > I don't see the problem either. It isn't a problem, as such. It just isn't useful - the breakpoints do not clash and we can easily identify that they do not. We don't print other breakpoints when we set a breakpoint, why print these? Useless stuff should be cut away. Andrew Stubbs