From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16536 invoked by alias); 9 May 2003 22:28:31 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 16512 invoked from network); 9 May 2003 22:28:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (207.219.125.131) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 9 May 2003 22:28:30 -0000 Received: from redhat.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC4092B2F; Fri, 9 May 2003 18:28:23 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <3EBC2B87.6050209@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 09 May 2003 22:28:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20030223 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mark Kettenis Cc: ezannoni@redhat.com, msnyder@redhat.com, drow@mvista.com, roland@redhat.com, gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: gdb/dwarf-frame.c References: <200305090945.h499jTH13137@magilla.sf.frob.com> <20030509134135.GA20959@nevyn.them.org> <16059.47081.289185.757260@localhost.redhat.com> <3EBBDEC6.8070403@redhat.com> <200305091942.h49Jgn64007660@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2003-05/txt/msg00170.txt.bz2 > Date: Fri, 09 May 2003 13:00:54 -0400 > From: Andrew Cagney > > > Which reminds me that we should probably have the NPTL thread support > > patches integrated in gdb as well, since we are at this (and I have > > your attention). Can somebody (Daniel, Mark?) take a look at the > > patches? I can guarentee that they work, since they were shipped with > > RHL9's gdb. > > Just FYI, Michael or Mark. I don't think Mark is exactly comfortable > with the Linux thread stuff so ... > > Yes indeed. I mostly use FreeBSD instead of Linux nowadays, so I > haven't tracked what's been happening on the Linux thread front too > closely. I get the feeling though that trying to support both the old > and the new threading model in the same code isn't a good idea :-(. There is apparently a story here. I'm told that some people were arguing that GDB would need a complete rewrite if it were to ever support NPTL. Turned out to effectively be the oposite. Andrew