From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 47987 invoked by alias); 15 Dec 2015 10:52:59 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 47975 invoked by uid 89); 15 Dec 2015 10:52:59 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=no version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Tue, 15 Dec 2015 10:52:58 +0000 Received: from int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.24]) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3B23BE7065; Tue, 15 Dec 2015 10:52:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id tBFAqtCV031126; Tue, 15 Dec 2015 05:52:56 -0500 Message-ID: <566FF107.4040205@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2015 10:52:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Don Breazeal , "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] Target remote mode fork and exec events References: <564F1A6A.3030301@redhat.com> <1449526447-10039-1-git-send-email-donb@codesourcery.com> <1449526447-10039-3-git-send-email-donb@codesourcery.com> <5666D32F.2040007@redhat.com> <566F18A8.2020006@codesourcery.com> In-Reply-To: <566F18A8.2020006@codesourcery.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2015-12/txt/msg00278.txt.bz2 On 12/14/2015 07:29 PM, Don Breazeal wrote: > On 12/8/2015 4:55 AM, Pedro Alves wrote: > Wow. I have a backlog of new tests that we've talked about related to > the fork/exec event support. I can likely make some other tests out of > the above as well. That'd be great, thanks! >> >> Sorry, I'm confused. Does this series cause a new FAIL, or not? > > Sorry about the gibberish. It is a FAIL that didn't occur with target > remote mode before, but now it behaves identically to how native and > extended-remote behave by generating the FAIL. Ah, I see now. Sorry for being dense. > > This is now pushed; the updated patch is attached. > I think with this, basic remote fork and exec events are complete. I > appreciate all your help with this project, Pedro. Thanks for hanging > in there with me! Thanks for doing all this! Thanks, Pedro Alves