From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26748 invoked by alias); 4 Feb 2002 16:59:24 -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 26634 invoked from network); 4 Feb 2002 16:59:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO is.elta.co.il) (199.203.121.2) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 4 Feb 2002 16:59:17 -0000 Received: from is (is [199.203.121.2]) by is.elta.co.il (8.9.3/8.8.8) with SMTP id SAA14476; Mon, 4 Feb 2002 18:58:20 +0200 (IST) Date: Mon, 04 Feb 2002 08:59:00 -0000 From: Eli Zaretskii X-Sender: eliz@is To: Pierre Muller cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFA] Add handling of Ctrl-Break for win32 native target. In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20020204161801.01af6210@ics.u-strasbg.fr> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-SW-Source: 2002-02/txt/msg00081.txt.bz2 On Mon, 4 Feb 2002, Pierre Muller wrote: > >IMHO, this should be mentioned in the manual somewhere (as a > >Windows-specific issue). > > I don't undersantd what you mean here: > > should we document this as a known limitation of the win32 native target up to 5.1.1 > or should we specify that Ctrl-Break gets also caught in newer versions of GDB? The latter. What I understood from the patch is that Ctrl-Break is not only caught, but is handled differently from other exceptions. If that is true, I think the users should know what will they see if they press Ctrl-Break. If I misunderstood, I apologize for the line noise.