From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: gdb@dontknow.org To: Mark Kettenis Cc: gdb@sourceware.cygnus.com Subject: Re: Linux threads support in GDB Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2000 17:12:00 -0000 Message-id: <961ec74675f93d46838aa1cf35f45df0@NO-ID-FOUND.mhonarc.org> References: <200010021257.e92CvRm16644@debye.wins.uva.nl> X-SW-Source: 2000-10/msg00015.html > Explicitly stopping individual threads is considered bad practice by > most threads experts. And of course using SIGSTOP is unportable. > That's why I don't consider this a critical problem. I can believe that it is considered bad, and right now the only implementation of thread stopping is used when creating a new thread in certain instances (Some applications expect threads to be created in a stopped state and use SIGSTOP to do so. I could implement support for this differently, waiting on a condition until the resume is given, and if there is a stop/resume pair used outside of this case then it would break GDB, but at this time it isn't used.) One application that uses SIGSTOP for suspending a running thread is Sun's J2SE. > I'd be delighted if you can find a way to make things work. I just > don't see how. If I get enough time to do so, I will think on the problem some more (so far I've only done brief poking around.) --Randy Contrary to popular belief, UNIX is user friendly. It just happens to be selective about who it makes friends with.