From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-return-31933-listarch-gdb=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 25934 invoked by alias); 21 May 2008 05:24:09 -0000
Received: (qmail 25922 invoked by uid 22791); 21 May 2008 05:24:08 -0000
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15)     by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Wed, 21 May 2008 05:23:51 +0000
Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) 	by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9B702A992E; 	Wed, 21 May 2008 01:23:49 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from rock.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) 	by localhost (rock.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) 	with LMTP id 7eVPID-rj58i; Wed, 21 May 2008 01:23:49 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) 	by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6DF1A2A9901; 	Wed, 21 May 2008 01:23:49 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) 	id 376A9E7ACD; Tue, 20 May 2008 22:23:47 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Wed, 21 May 2008 05:24:00 -0000
From: Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com>
To: Vladimir Prus <vladimir@codesourcery.com>
Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [GDB/MI] missing token in "stopped" output after -exec-run?
Message-ID: <20080521052347.GD4148@adacore.com>
References: <20080521035924.GA4148@adacore.com> <g10agt$3e9$1@ger.gmane.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <g10agt$3e9$1@ger.gmane.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i
Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb.sourceware.org>
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: 2008-05/txt/msg00151.txt.bz2

> Yes (and I've explicitly posted to the list about this change, quite
> some time before actually changing things). The situation is:

Oh sorry, I vaguely remember this discussion indeed.

> Does it cause any problems for you?

No problem whatsoever. I have a testcase in our testsuite that did check
for the token on the "*stopped" notification, but the intent was really
to check that a -var-update doesn't crash the debugger.  So I relaxed
a little our test to accept the absence of token and that was it for me.

The purpose of my message was to inform you of the change, in case
it was not intended and somehow slipped through testing. Glad to be
wrong :).

-- 
Joel