From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18775 invoked by alias); 27 Oct 2003 20:04:54 -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 18768 invoked from network); 27 Oct 2003 20:04:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO bilbo.inter.net.il) (192.114.186.18) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 27 Oct 2003 20:04:54 -0000 Received: from zaretski ([80.230.156.233]) by bilbo.inter.net.il (Mirapoint Messaging Server MOS 3.3.7-GR) with ESMTP id BSQ47788; Mon, 27 Oct 2003 21:48:43 +0200 (IST) Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2003 20:04:00 -0000 From: "Eli Zaretskii" To: Andrew Cagney Message-Id: <6480-Mon27Oct2003214328+0200-eliz@elta.co.il> CC: mec@shout.net, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, drow@mvista.com In-reply-to: <3F9D43F3.50603@redhat.com> (message from Andrew Cagney on Mon, 27 Oct 2003 11:12:35 -0500) Subject: Re: [rfa/doc/threads] thread breakpoints and system calls Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii References: <200310261459.h9QExPlc022980@duracef.shout.net> <1659-Sun26Oct2003193033+0200-eliz@elta.co.il> <3F9D43F3.50603@redhat.com> X-SW-Source: 2003-10/txt/msg00794.txt.bz2 > Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2003 11:12:35 -0500 > From: Andrew Cagney > > > + It is legal behavior for a system call to return early, so @value{GDBN} > >> + does not cause your program to behave illegally. > > Just for the future, would erroneous be a useful word? Something like that, yes.