This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [RFC] gdb could leave inferior running as a background process
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 10:51:29AM -0700, Paul Pluzhnikov wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 9:46 AM, Paul Pluzhnikov <email@example.com> wrote:
> > Would attached patch work better then?
> Actually, the second patch doesn't fix the problem by itself:
> inferior is resumed, then warning is issued, then we block.
> So both the first and second patches are needed.
Any time the second patch is "needed", there's still a race condition
and the bug is present. We're running in parallel with the inferior
at this point.
Where is the warning issued?