From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-return-26706-listarch-gdb=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 29510 invoked by alias); 26 Oct 2006 17:54:06 -0000
Received: (qmail 29502 invoked by uid 22791); 26 Oct 2006 17:54:05 -0000
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from sibelius.xs4all.nl (HELO brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl) (82.92.89.47)     by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Thu, 26 Oct 2006 17:53:53 +0000
Received: from elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl (root@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl [192.168.0.2]) 	by brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.13.8/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k9QHrIBw020344; 	Thu, 26 Oct 2006 19:53:18 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl (kettenis@localhost.sibelius.xs4all.nl [127.0.0.1]) 	by elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.13.8/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k9QHrHoF022138; 	Thu, 26 Oct 2006 19:53:17 +0200 (CEST)
Received: (from kettenis@localhost) 	by elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.13.8/8.13.8/Submit) id k9QHrHwN014773; 	Thu, 26 Oct 2006 19:53:17 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2006 17:54:00 -0000
Message-Id: <200610261753.k9QHrHwN014773@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl>
From: Mark Kettenis <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl>
To: drow@false.org
CC: gdb@sourceware.org
In-reply-to: <20061026153732.GA4358@nevyn.them.org> (message from Daniel 	Jacobowitz on Thu, 26 Oct 2006 11:37:32 -0400)
Subject: Re: [rfc/remote] Tell remote stubs which signals are boring
References: <20061025212441.GA622@nevyn.them.org> <453FEB98.8090202@avtrex.com> <20061026014027.GA9023@nevyn.them.org> <E1GczGN-0006oc-Q7@fencepost.gnu.org> <E1GczBB-0006Wu-9h@fencepost.gnu.org> <20061026121838.GA28927@nevyn.them.org> <13276.192.87.1.22.1161876431.squirrel@webmail.xs4all.nl> <20061026153732.GA4358@nevyn.them.org>
Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2006-10/txt/msg00268.txt.bz2

> Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2006 11:37:32 -0400
> From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>
> 
> On Thu, Oct 26, 2006 at 05:27:11PM +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> > Perhaps I should even add more confusing statements to that.  What if I say
> > "handle SIGALRM nostop noprint pass" after I've connected to the remote
> > target.  Will it send a new  QPassSignals packet when I do that?  AFAICT
> > from your patch it doesn't do that, and that seems broken to me.
> 
> In fact it will do that.  We check that the most recently sent
> QPassSignals packet matches the current set of ignored signals
> at every resume.

Cool!