From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-return-12780-listarch-gdb=sources.redhat.com@sources.redhat.com>
Received: (qmail 19223 invoked by alias); 26 Feb 2003 02:22:13 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-subscribe@sources.redhat.com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb@sources.redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-help@sources.redhat.com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com
Received: (qmail 19216 invoked from network); 26 Feb 2003 02:22:12 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO hub.ott.qnx.com) (209.226.137.76)
  by 172.16.49.205 with SMTP; 26 Feb 2003 02:22:12 -0000
Received: from smtp.ott.qnx.com (smtp.ott.qnx.com [10.0.2.158])
	by hub.ott.qnx.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id VAA28734;
	Tue, 25 Feb 2003 21:09:59 -0500
Received: from dash ([192.168.20.32]) by smtp.ott.qnx.com (8.8.8/8.6.12) with SMTP id VAA29984; Tue, 25 Feb 2003 21:22:11 -0500
Message-ID: <001e01c2dd3e$619dd640$2a00a8c0@dash>
From: "Kris Warkentin" <kewarken@qnx.com>
To: "Jason Molenda" <jmolenda@apple.com>
Cc: <gdb@sources.redhat.com>
References: <38D95BB0-490C-11D7-83B0-003065BC3540@apple.com>
Subject: Re: deferred breakpoints
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2003 02:22:00 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
X-SW-Source: 2003-02/txt/msg00553.txt.bz2

> Our developers use the future-breaks a lot here at Apple, they work
> well for the sort of problem you're looking at.

Thanks for responding Jason.  I'm curious: are these patches in use at Apple
not considered suitable for submission to the FSF?  I'm just wondering why
you maintain a separate tree rather than pushing everything out.  We're
trying hard to get all our changes rolled in to avoid the hassle of having a
separate tree.

cheers,

Kris