From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-prs-return-16871-listarch-gdb-prs=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 22112 invoked by alias); 24 Oct 2014 18:10:05 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gdb-prs-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb-prs.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-prs-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-prs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-prs@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-prs-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/lists.html#faqs>
Sender: gdb-prs-owner@sourceware.org
Received: (qmail 22089 invoked by uid 48); 24 Oct 2014 18:10:04 -0000
From: "palves at redhat dot com" <sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org>
To: gdb-prs@sourceware.org
Subject: [Bug cli/17300] crash in non-stop mode with continue -a &
 (readline_callback_read_char() called with no handler!)
Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2014 18:10:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gdb
X-Bugzilla-Component: cli
X-Bugzilla-Version: 7.8
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: palves at redhat dot com
X-Bugzilla-Status: REOPENED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P2
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: palves at redhat dot com
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 7.9
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-17300-4717-5uGCfpeLZn@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-17300-4717@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-17300-4717@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-SW-Source: 2014-q4/txt/msg00114.txt.bz2

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17300

--- Comment #14 from Pedro Alves <palves at redhat dot com> ---
> There is no point to repeat "continue -a&" on subsequent <RET> when the 
> program is already running.

The command is repeated, but given it resumes all threads that are stopped, it
has no effect if all threads are already running.  It repeats in the sense that
if you have:

 (gdb) continue -a&
 (gdb) <RET>

(nothing happens)

 * some thread stops *
 (gdb) <RET>

Then this last <RET> repeats the c -a& and resumes the thread that stopped.

This is _no_ different from explicitly issuing the command rather than
just typing <RET>:

 (gdb) continue -a&
 (gdb) continue -a&

(nothing happens)

 * some thread stops *
 (gdb) continue -a&

Then this last c -a& resumes the thread that stopped.

And in turn, is different from commands that are documented to truly not
repeat, like, e.g., attach, detach, display, signal, target etc.  E.g.:

 (gdb) attach 1
 Attaching to process 1
 ptrace: Operation not permitted.
 (gdb) <RET>
 (gdb) <RET>
 (gdb) <RET>
 (gdb) <RET>

Those RET's don't really execute any command (related, I think GDB should say
something like "no command to repeat", or some such, rather than be quiet, for
truly non-repeat commands).

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.