From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 36560 invoked by alias); 20 May 2019 09:49:43 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 36548 invoked by uid 89); 20 May 2019 09:49:43 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 spammy=HX-Languages-Length:374, H*r:TLS1_3, H*r:sk:AEAD-AE X-HELO: mail-wm1-f66.google.com Received: from mail-wm1-f66.google.com (HELO mail-wm1-f66.google.com) (209.85.128.66) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Mon, 20 May 2019 09:49:42 +0000 Received: by mail-wm1-f66.google.com with SMTP id i3so12570977wml.4 for ; Mon, 20 May 2019 02:49:42 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: Received: from ?IPv6:2001:8a0:f913:f700:4eeb:42ff:feef:f164? ([2001:8a0:f913:f700:4eeb:42ff:feef:f164]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id t13sm36416987wra.81.2019.05.20.02.49.39 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=AEAD-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 20 May 2019 02:49:39 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH] Supress SIGTTOU when handling errors To: Andrew Burgess , Alan Hayward References: <20190516155150.71826-1-alan.hayward@arm.com> <87y333ev6j.fsf@igel.home> <20190519220622.GB2568@embecosm.com> <2DDEE8DB-726F-466B-AB69-593351102ECB@arm.com> <20190520091157.GC2568@embecosm.com> Cc: Andreas Schwab , "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" , nd From: Pedro Alves Message-ID: <67662c59-076f-34e6-e347-d1a1f2926402@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 20 May 2019 09:49:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.2.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20190520091157.GC2568@embecosm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2019-05/txt/msg00462.txt.bz2 On 5/20/19 10:11 AM, Andrew Burgess wrote: > > I'd be just as happy with this approach as with the patch I > suggested. I'd like Pedro's input given he wrote the original > terminal patch that exposed this issue. I'd like a chance to give my input too. :-) I'll take a look as soon as I have a chance. Thanks, Pedro Alves