This is the mail archive of the
gdb@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: Time to expand "Program received signal" ?
- From: Joel Brobecker <brobecker at adacore dot com>
- To: Pedro Alves <palves at redhat dot com>
- Cc: "gdb at sourceware dot org" <gdb at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 08:25:30 -0800
- Subject: Re: Time to expand "Program received signal" ?
- References: <50A13A4E.3020000@redhat.com>
> A patch like the below would result in:
>
> Thread 2 [Thread 0x7ffff7fcf700 (LWP 12023) "sigstep-threads"] received signal SIGUSR1, User defined signal 1.
[...]
> An option to avoid the duplicate "Thread" would be to stick with the
> current "stopped" output.
[...]
> [Thread 0x7ffff7fcf700 (LWP 12023) "sigstep-threads"] #2 received signal SIGUSR1, User defined signal 1.
> [Thread 0x7ffff7fd0740 (LWP 12019) "sigstep-threads"] #1 received signal SIGUSR1, User defined signal 1.
FWIW, I think that your first choice is best. I don't think that
the "Thread" duplication is a problem, whereas I do indeed find
the #1/#2 confusing.
--
Joel