From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20301 invoked by alias); 25 Jul 2013 16:31:18 -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 20287 invoked by uid 89); 25 Jul 2013 16:31:18 -0000 X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-5.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_WL,RDNS_NONE,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.1 Received: from Unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.84/v0.84-167-ge50287c) with ESMTP; Thu, 25 Jul 2013 16:31:15 +0000 Received: from int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.25]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r6PGV8Za020890 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Thu, 25 Jul 2013 12:31:08 -0400 Received: from barimba (ovpn-113-128.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.113.128]) by int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r6PGV7Iv020907 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Thu, 25 Jul 2013 12:31:07 -0400 From: Tom Tromey To: Pedro Alves Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: RFC: don't call add_target for thread_db_ops References: <1372783053-14925-1-git-send-email-tromey@redhat.com> <51D3E4CB.3060801@redhat.com> <87ehamwwtq.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <51F13898.2050700@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2013 16:31:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <51F13898.2050700@redhat.com> (Pedro Alves's message of "Thu, 25 Jul 2013 15:39:20 +0100") Message-ID: <87ppu6vbxx.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-SW-Source: 2013-07/txt/msg00623.txt.bz2 Pedro> Thanks. Do you plan on doing the same to the remaining Pedro> thread_stratum targets? If not, I'll do it at some point. Pedro> I'd prefer not leaving the incomplete transition in Pedro> place; it's bound to confuse someone later on. I wouldn't Pedro> worry much if an affected target goes untested. I wasn't planning to, but my main concern was the testing; I will write the patch today. Tom