From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14866 invoked by alias); 17 Mar 2006 07:07:56 -0000 Received: (qmail 14857 invoked by uid 22791); 17 Mar 2006 07:07:55 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from zigzag.lvk.cs.msu.su (HELO zigzag.lvk.cs.msu.su) (158.250.17.23) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Fri, 17 Mar 2006 07:07:53 +0000 Received: from Debian-exim by zigzag.lvk.cs.msu.su with spam-scanned (Exim 4.50) id 1FK93p-000862-VW for gdb@sources.redhat.com; Fri, 17 Mar 2006 10:07:51 +0300 Received: from zigzag.lvk.cs.msu.su ([158.250.17.23]) by zigzag.lvk.cs.msu.su with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1FK93j-00084g-ER; Fri, 17 Mar 2006 10:07:39 +0300 From: Vladimir Prus To: Jim Ingham Subject: Re: MI and pending breakpoints User-Agent: KMail/1.7.2 References: <200603151929.31842.ghost@cs.msu.su> <5E57F00D-E734-47F2-B880-06FAF0308DF0@apple.com> In-Reply-To: <5E57F00D-E734-47F2-B880-06FAF0308DF0@apple.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline X-UID: 11967 X-Length: 1556 Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2006 10:35:00 -0000 Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200603171007.38624.ghost@cs.msu.su> Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-03/txt/msg00114.txt.bz2 [this message was originally sent off-list by mistake, reposting to list now] On Wednesday 15 March 2006 19:37, you wrote: > I thought that would work, but as I said, we don't do it that way, we > do: > > -break-insert -f > > which turns the pending on automatically. I think that's a much more > convenient way to do it... Any way, I've just looked at Apple code, and it considerable differs in '-break-insert' handling. In CVS HEAD, gdb_breakpoint calls do_captured_parse_breakpoint, and exits. In Apple version, gdb_breakpoint calls break_command_2 which calls do_captured_parse_breakpoint and then specially deals with pending breakpoints. So, would it be a good idea to port/mimic Apple's changes? In fact, even if I port them I'll still need to workaround this bug on KDevelop side, but anyway, what about porting the fixes? - Volodya