[RFC] gdb could leave inferior running as a background process

[Daniel Jacobowitz]

On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 10:51:29AM -0700, Paul Pluzhnikov wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 9:46 AM, Paul Pluzhnikov <ppluzhnikov@google.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?

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery