* ping: [PATCH 1/3] Never kill PID on: gdb exec PID
@ 2016-04-14 15:44 Jan Kratochvil
2016-04-14 16:41 ` Luis Machado
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Jan Kratochvil @ 2016-04-14 15:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-patches
It would be nice to upstream at least this fix of the series:
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] Never kill PID on: gdb exec PID
Message-ID: <20151016204733.27288.56498.stgit@host1.jankratochvil.net>
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2015-10/msg00301.html
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: ping: [PATCH 1/3] Never kill PID on: gdb exec PID
2016-04-14 15:44 ping: [PATCH 1/3] Never kill PID on: gdb exec PID Jan Kratochvil
@ 2016-04-14 16:41 ` Luis Machado
2016-04-14 17:24 ` Jan Kratochvil
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Luis Machado @ 2016-04-14 16:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jan Kratochvil, gdb-patches
On 04/14/2016 10:44 AM, Jan Kratochvil wrote:
> It would be nice to upstream at least this fix of the series:
> Subject: [PATCH 1/3] Never kill PID on: gdb exec PID
> Message-ID: <20151016204733.27288.56498.stgit@host1.jankratochvil.net>
> https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2015-10/msg00301.html
>
Is this still happening after 57d1de9cf3ba8dd98eaf4a3d131c05ec4c49779d?
I couldn't reproduce what you saw with master GDB.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: ping: [PATCH 1/3] Never kill PID on: gdb exec PID
2016-04-14 16:41 ` Luis Machado
@ 2016-04-14 17:24 ` Jan Kratochvil
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Jan Kratochvil @ 2016-04-14 17:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Luis Machado; +Cc: gdb-patches, Gary Benson
On Thu, 14 Apr 2016 18:41:07 +0200, Luis Machado wrote:
> On 04/14/2016 10:44 AM, Jan Kratochvil wrote:
> >It would be nice to upstream at least this fix of the series:
> > Subject: [PATCH 1/3] Never kill PID on: gdb exec PID
> > Message-ID: <20151016204733.27288.56498.stgit@host1.jankratochvil.net>
> > https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2015-10/msg00301.html
>
> Is this still happening after 57d1de9cf3ba8dd98eaf4a3d131c05ec4c49779d?
>
> I couldn't reproduce what you saw with master GDB.
The new testcase of mine has been fixed in the meantime by:
bf74e428bca61022bd5cdf6bf28789a184748b4d is the first bad (=good) commit
commit bf74e428bca61022bd5cdf6bf28789a184748b4d
Author: Gary Benson <gbenson@redhat.com>
Date: Wed Feb 24 11:31:58 2016 +0000
Fix logic in exec_file_locate_attach
So the bug is probably fixed; I still find the logic in my patch correct as
some safety whether to run core_file_command() or not but I will no longer
ping the patch in the future.
Thanks,
Jan
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2016-04-14 17:24 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2016-04-14 15:44 ping: [PATCH 1/3] Never kill PID on: gdb exec PID Jan Kratochvil
2016-04-14 16:41 ` Luis Machado
2016-04-14 17:24 ` Jan Kratochvil
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox