Re: Some more multi-fork fixes

[Michael Snyder <msnyder at redhat dot com>]

Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 10, 2006 at 11:09:43AM -0800, Michael Snyder wrote:
>
> > Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 05:41:15PM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > > I'm up against a bit of a brick wall at the moment.  I've got
> > > > patches in my source tree to unify the single-threaded and
> > > > multi-threaded code in the Linux native layer into a single
> > > > combined target.  But since this is an inherently single-threaded
> > > > operation the multi-threaded code totally falls down - switching
> > > > forks doesn't preserve things like the LWP list, leading to
> > > > messy timeouts.  I'm going to find some minimally painful
> > > > way to make the two of them talk to each other.
> > >
> > >
> > > FYI, I've got that more or less working now (as well as it was
> > > previously). I'll post it in a bit.
> >
> > Hey Daniel, what's the status on this?
>
>
> Sorry, didn't close the circle: I did post this.  It's in these
> two:
>   http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2006-02/msg00493.html
>   http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2006-02/msg00494.html

Ah, that's what I was looking for.

> I've still got to work out the glibc side of the fourth patch
> in that series, but I don't think there's anything stopping me
> from committing the others; I should do that.  Does the first
> one above look good to you?

Got some questions -- I'll reply in-thread.