This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sourceware.org 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]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: [PATCH] Autoload-breakpoints without report-async

From: Hui Zhu <hui_zhu at mentor dot com>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu dot org>
Cc: <gdb-patches at sourceware dot org>, <Yao_Qi at mentor dot com>, <stan_shebs at mentor dot com>
Date: Fri, 4 May 2012 09:00:30 +0800
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Autoload-breakpoints without report-async
References: <4FA2B434.60706@mentor.com> <83ipgd6vw0.fsf@gnu.org>

On 05/04/12 01:02, Eli Zaretskii wrote:

Date: Fri, 4 May 2012 00:37:08 +0800
From: Hui Zhu<hui_zhu@mentor.com>
CC: Yao Qi<Yao_Qi@mentor.com>, Stan Shebs<stan_shebs@mentor.com>, Eli
  Zaretskii<eliz@gnu.org>

According to the mail form Yao.  I thought make the autoload-breakpoints and report-async function together make it too hard to review.  So I move the function that depend on the report-async to be a series of separate patches after report-async.
Then the other patches of autoload-breakpoints can be reveiw separate from report-async.


Is the documentation part here any different from the last time I
reviewed it?

Oops, I post the wrong version. The attachment is the right version. Please help me review it.

Thanks,
Hui

Attachment: autoload-breakpoints-doc.txt
Description: Text document

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCH] Autoload-breakpoints without report-async
  - From: Eli Zaretskii

References:
- [PATCH] Autoload-breakpoints without report-async
  - From: Hui Zhu
- Re: [PATCH] Autoload-breakpoints without report-async
  - From: Eli Zaretskii

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