Re: Move the multi-forks support to the generic multi-inferiors support.

[Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com>]

>>>>> "Pedro" == Pedro Alves <pedro@codesourcery.com> writes:

Tom> How about this?  It adds the column headings and prints something when
Tom> there are no inferiors.

Pedro> This is fine with me, thanks, but,

Pedro> are you planning on doing something similar to "info threads"
Pedro> output?

I wasn't planning to.

Really I just wanted to get column headers for the otherwise-obscure
"info inferiors" columns...

Pedro> IMO, both these commands should be consistent.  In that case, you
Pedro> may have an issue with MI, as it calls print_thread_info --- I don't
Pedro> know if using a table instead of a list changes MI output.

I think it does, so changing it would not be ok.

Pedro> (I was a bit surprised to (re-)find that MI doesn't use
Pedro> print_inferior)

Naughty.  Though at a quick glance I didn't see where MI does any
printing of the inferiors...?

In this case I think the patch is ok anyway -- an error in "info
threads" does not, IMO, imply that we should propagate the mistake to
other commands.  Let me know what you think of this, I won't install
the patch if you feel differently.

Tom