[RFC] PR 15075 dprintf interferes with "next"

[Pedro Alves]

On 06/03/2013 05:06 AM, Hui Zhu wrote:
> Ping http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2013-05/msg00958.html
> 

As this exposes the non-stop racy failure, we should fix it that one
first.  Failing that, we should kfail or skip the test with
remote targets.  Let's consider the latter option later if we don't
manage to address the race timely.  As I said on:

 http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2013-05/msg01111.html

I'm investigating this.  I have a prototype patch, but I need
a bit more to handle some details, like what to do with
signal catchpoints when we find threads had been stopped with
a signal (I'm currently thinking of skipping the catchpoints).
I'm composing a test to exercise/expose this kind of stuff,
for a better RFC.

-- 
Pedro Alves