From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 30246 invoked by alias); 5 Dec 2002 03:35:23 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 30229 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 03:35:22 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 03:35:22 -0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id gB53AGP21188 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 22:10:16 -0500 Received: from pobox.corp.redhat.com (pobox.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.156]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id gB53ZLD23893 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 22:35:21 -0500 Received: from localhost.redhat.com (romulus-int.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.27.46]) by pobox.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id gB53ZK907749; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 22:35:20 -0500 Received: by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 469) id D152DFF79; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 22:31:01 -0500 (EST) From: Elena Zannoni MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <15854.51317.723007.325467@localhost.redhat.com> Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2002 19:35:00 -0000 To: bgat@billgatliff.com Cc: Elena Zannoni , gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: gdb-5.2.1 loses command line In-Reply-To: <20021204211535.C31284@saturn.billgatliff.com> References: <20021204204915.B31284@saturn.billgatliff.com> <15854.49047.135664.970802@localhost.redhat.com> <20021204211535.C31284@saturn.billgatliff.com> X-SW-Source: 2002-12/txt/msg00087.txt.bz2 William A. Gatliff writes: > Elena: > > On Wed, Dec 04, 2002 at 09:53:11PM -0500, Elena Zannoni wrote: > > William A. Gatliff writes: > > > Guys: > > > > > > > > > > Hmmm this smells like async/event loop/signal handling problems. Can > > you try the same but after starting the debugger with --noasync? (if > > the --noasync is still there, that is... and if the noasync code > > hasn't bitrotted) > > It appears to still be there, and it appears to have no affect. > Sorry, I recalled a problem with ctrl-Z and async, but I was misremembering. > > b.g. > -- > Bill Gatliff > I'm an embedded GNU developer first, GNU instructor second. > http://billgatliff.com