This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sourceware.cygnus.com mailing list for the GDB project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: [robertl@sco.com: threads RH6/Sparc vs. GDB]

To: "H.J. Lu" <hjl at lucon dot org>
Subject: Re: [robertl@sco.com: threads RH6/Sparc vs. GDB]
From: Robert Lipe <robertl at sco dot com>
Date: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 11:11:45 -0600
Cc: Jim Kingdon <kingdon at redhat dot com>, gdb-patches at sourceware dot cygnus dot com
References: <199911010048.TAA07679@devserv.devel.redhat.com> <19991101161449.373C51B493@ocean.lucon.org>

H.J. Lu wrote:

> May I suggest to hold any Linuxthreads patches for the time being?

Fine with me.  I'm certainly not in a position to argue strongly for
them.

> I have a patch which will make most of them obsolete. I will send
> a patch after the i387 issue is resolved. I don't want to add more
> to the backlog of Linux related patches.

I would very much like to see something settle down that would benefit
the users of GDB and threads on non-IA32 systems as well.  I'm sure
that the needs of the many (Linux/IA32) outweigh the needs of the
few (Linux/everything else) but if this could be worked out in a
Linux-dependent manner instead of a Linux/IA32-dependent manner, that
would be most helpful.

Thanx,
RJL

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [robertl@sco.com: threads RH6/Sparc vs. GDB]
  - From: H.J. Lu

References:
- [robertl@sco.com: threads RH6/Sparc vs. GDB]
  - From: Jim Kingdon
- Re: [robertl@sco.com: threads RH6/Sparc vs. GDB]
  - From: H.J. Lu

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]