From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12955 invoked by alias); 28 Jun 2004 17:03:18 -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 12939 invoked from network); 28 Jun 2004 17:03:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO aragorn.inter.net.il) (192.114.186.23) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 28 Jun 2004 17:03:17 -0000 Received: from zaretski (pns03-209-77.inter.net.il [80.230.209.77]) by aragorn.inter.net.il (MOS 3.4.6-GR) with ESMTP id DLN84950; Mon, 28 Jun 2004 20:03:13 +0300 (IDT) Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2004 17:03:00 -0000 From: "Eli Zaretskii" To: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Message-Id: <7137-Mon28Jun2004195856+0300-eliz@gnu.org> In-reply-to: <20040628111418.GA21679@cygbert.vinschen.de> (message from Corinna Vinschen on Mon, 28 Jun 2004 13:14:18 +0200) Subject: Re: [RFA] infcmd.c: Fix UI problem in attach_command Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii References: <20040626121121.GC8039@cygbert.vinschen.de> <9003-Sun27Jun2004201103+0300-eliz@gnu.org> <20040628111418.GA21679@cygbert.vinschen.de> X-SW-Source: 2004-06/txt/msg00642.txt.bz2 > Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2004 13:14:18 +0200 > From: Corinna Vinschen > > > > Do you (or anyone else, like Elena) know why do we relinquish the > > terminal to the inferior while loading the symbol table? It sounds > > like a strange thing to do at this point. > > I don't know and it sounds strange to me as well. I've tested a simlified > patch which just moves the call to target_terminal_inferior right before > the normal_stop call. It works as good as my original patch, but I'm not > sure if there's a specific situation which requires an early switch to > the inferior. I tend to suggest that we commit this simplified patch and see if anybody screams. Hmm... I'm not sure whether there's a designated maintainer for infcmd.c. Andrew?