Re: Make TestBreakpoints deterministic

[Andrew Cagney <cagney at redhat dot com>]

> If we startup the eventloop again "too soon" what happens is that we see
> the proc/task again when we do a Manager.host.requestRefreshXXX(). This
> adds the proc as detached to the core. But the kernel still has a
> terminate event pending for us from when we were actually attached to it
> (which seems to be the reason the proc is still around). So we must
> really make sure that we have received all events from the kernel,
> including the terminated event, even after we have detached already.
>   
That's the bug then - the original tearDown didn't detach frysk from 
those processes, presumably because it didn't know that it needed to?

The TestLib.tearDown code iterates over a list of registered processes 
brute force detaching and killing each in turn.  Provided the relevant 
processes are registered then all should be good.  The eventLoop should 
certainly not be running at the time tearDown is reached - a bug in the 
test case; and needing to add sleep just tells us that the test is 
non-deterministic :-(

Andrew