From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17854 invoked by alias); 16 Mar 2019 08:31:54 -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 17835 invoked by uid 89); 16 Mar 2019 08:31:53 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-3.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 spammy= X-HELO: eggs.gnu.org Received: from eggs.gnu.org (HELO eggs.gnu.org) (209.51.188.92) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Sat, 16 Mar 2019 08:31:52 +0000 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:57091) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1h54jO-0006LG-Io; Sat, 16 Mar 2019 04:31:50 -0400 Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=1203 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1h54jN-0003CA-RU; Sat, 16 Mar 2019 04:31:50 -0400 Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2019 08:31:00 -0000 Message-Id: <834l83z0d4.fsf@gnu.org> From: Eli Zaretskii To: tom@tromey.com CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org In-reply-to: <83bm2bz2hi.fsf@gnu.org> (message from Eli Zaretskii on Sat, 16 Mar 2019 09:45:45 +0200) Subject: Re: [RFC 0/6] Demangle minimal symbol names in worker threads References: <20190309172300.2764-1-tom@tromey.com> <83tvgb7we9.fsf@gnu.org> <87ef7d8298.fsf@tromey.com> <83lg1k4vhx.fsf@gnu.org> <83muly3htw.fsf@gnu.org> <87mulvvhs9.fsf@tromey.com> <83bm2bz2hi.fsf@gnu.org> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2019-03/txt/msg00331.txt.bz2 > Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2019 09:45:45 +0200 > From: Eli Zaretskii > CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org > > > Eli> This is still true. We could detect at configure time that > > Eli> std::thread isn't supported and revert to serial alternative code > > Eli> instead. Is that reasonable? > > > > Yeah, I think it's not too hard to do this. > > Then I think this would be a good way forward in the shirt run. ^^^^^^^^^ Oops, I meant "short run", of course...