This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the GDB project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: [patch/ob] not_a_breakpoint -> not_a_sw_breakpoint

From: Kevin Buettner <kevinb at redhat dot com>
To: Andrew Cagney <ac131313 at ges dot redhat dot com>, Kevin Buettner <kevinb at redhat dot com>
Cc: gdb-patches at sources dot redhat dot com
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2002 13:12:36 -0700
Subject: Re: [patch/ob] not_a_breakpoint -> not_a_sw_breakpoint
References: <3D5D1C3E.8070203@ges.redhat.com> <1020816164312.ZM11179@localhost.localdomain> <3D5D37A7.2090003@ges.redhat.com> <1020816185159.ZM30848@localhost.localdomain> <3D5D53AF.1000908@ges.redhat.com>

On Aug 16,  3:34pm, Andrew Cagney wrote:

> I think that is separate.  The ``intent'' of the variable is to indicate 
> that what is being looked at isn't a trap due to a software breakpoint 
> event.

Okay, I've studied the code some more and I finally agree.

(I haven't convinced myself though that the conditions used to
instantiate this variable will guarantee this ``intent''.)

Kevin

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [patch/ob] not_a_breakpoint -> not_a_sw_breakpoint
  - From: Andrew Cagney

References:
- [patch/ob] not_a_breakpoint -> not_a_sw_breakpoint
  - From: Andrew Cagney
- Re: [patch/ob] not_a_breakpoint -> not_a_sw_breakpoint
  - From: Kevin Buettner
- Re: [patch/ob] not_a_breakpoint -> not_a_sw_breakpoint
  - From: Andrew Cagney
- Re: [patch/ob] not_a_breakpoint -> not_a_sw_breakpoint
  - From: Kevin Buettner
- Re: [patch/ob] not_a_breakpoint -> not_a_sw_breakpoint
  - From: Andrew Cagney

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]