From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 32195 invoked by alias); 2 Apr 2009 03:15:31 -0000 Received: (qmail 31744 invoked by uid 22791); 2 Apr 2009 03:15:27 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_SOFTFAIL X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mtaout7.012.net.il (HELO mtaout7.012.net.il) (84.95.2.19) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 02 Apr 2009 03:15:21 +0000 Received: from conversion-daemon.i-mtaout7.012.net.il by i-mtaout7.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0KHG00100EBXPA00@i-mtaout7.012.net.il> for gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Thu, 02 Apr 2009 06:15:18 +0300 (IDT) Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([77.127.171.54]) by i-mtaout7.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0KHG0018JEDH5H00@i-mtaout7.012.net.il>; Thu, 02 Apr 2009 06:15:18 +0300 (IDT) Date: Thu, 02 Apr 2009 03:15:00 -0000 From: Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: [gdbserver/RFC/RFA] Implement multiprocess extensions, add linux multiproces support. In-reply-to: <200904020030.08885.pedro@codesourcery.com> To: Pedro Alves Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii Message-id: References: <200903301528.00506.pedro@codesourcery.com> <200904020030.08885.pedro@codesourcery.com> X-IsSubscribed: yes 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: 2009-04/txt/msg00025.txt.bz2 > From: Pedro Alves > Date: Thu, 2 Apr 2009 00:30:08 +0100 > Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org > > On Monday 30 March 2009 19:32:59, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > > From: Pedro Alves > > > Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2009 15:28:00 +0100 > > > > > > This patch adds multiprocess support to gdbserver. > > > > Thanks. > > > > If this is approved, I think we will want a NEWS entry. > > Agreed. But, these gdbserver multiprocess changes aren't > much user visible yet. We need gdb changes to expose this extra > functionality, and to make it more useful. I was thinking of > combining the multi-process features into a NEWS entry more closer > to the release, depending on what makes it to the release. Is > that OK with you? Yes.