From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25165 invoked by alias); 29 Nov 2012 21:09:08 -0000 Received: (qmail 25150 invoked by uid 22791); 29 Nov 2012 21:09:07 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 29 Nov 2012 21:08:59 +0000 Received: from int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.24]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id qATL8pln015645 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 29 Nov 2012 16:08:51 -0500 Received: from barimba (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id qATL8nTw023873 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Thu, 29 Nov 2012 16:08:50 -0500 From: Tom Tromey To: Mircea Gherzan Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, keven.boell@intel.com, marc.khouzam@ericsson.com, vladimir@codesourcery.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/3] MI: add the -catch-load and -catch-unload commands References: <1354031591-20226-1-git-send-email-mircea.gherzan@intel.com> <87obiidfxl.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <50B78BBB.1000907@intel.com> Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2012 21:09:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <50B78BBB.1000907@intel.com> (Mircea Gherzan's message of "Thu, 29 Nov 2012 17:22:19 +0100") Message-ID: <87ehjc3yn2.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain 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 X-SW-Source: 2012-11/txt/msg00902.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Mircea" == Mircea Gherzan writes: >> It seems more consistent to me to suppress the notification and then >> print the new breakpoint information as the result of this command. Mircea> This has been fixed in v7 of the series. There were some other review comments you haven't addressed yet: more comments for the one function in breakpoint.c, and possible raciness in the test case. Tom