diff --git a/gdb/ChangeLog b/gdb/ChangeLog index 101d468a590..d6e761ac315 100644 --- a/gdb/ChangeLog +++ b/gdb/ChangeLog @@ -1,3 +1,7 @@ +2001-06-28 Andrew Cagney + + * TODO: Delete all thread items. The thread code was overhauled. + 2001-07-04 Elena Zannoni * memattr.c (create_mem_region): Move n to next memory region, diff --git a/gdb/TODO b/gdb/TODO index 8da8747683e..ab50b16b2de 100644 --- a/gdb/TODO +++ b/gdb/TODO @@ -180,11 +180,6 @@ will still occure. sid/component/configure.in mis-configures GDB 5.2 - Fixes =============== --- - -Thread support. Right now, as soon as a thread finishes and exits, -you're hosed. This problem is reported once a week or so. - -- GDB 5.2 - New features @@ -858,58 +853,6 @@ way to address this is provide a generic "reset" command and target vector. http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/2000-10/msg00011.html --- - - Thread Support - ============== - --- - -Generic: lin-thread cannot handle thread exit (Mark Kettenis, Michael -Snyder) http://sourceware.cygnus.com/ml/gdb/2000-q1/msg00525.html - -The thread_db assisted debugging code doesn't handle exiting threads -properly, at least in combination with glibc 2.1.3 (the framework is -there, just not the actual code). There are at least two problems -that prevent this from working. - -As an additional reference point, the pre thread_db code did not work -either. - --- - -GNU/Linux/x86 and random thread signals (and Solaris/SPARC but not -Solaris/x86). -http://sourceware.cygnus.com/ml/gdb/2000-q1/msg00336.html - -Christopher Blizzard writes: - -So, I've done some more digging into this and it looks like Jim -Kingdon has reported this problem in the past: - -http://sourceware.cygnus.com/ml/bug-gdb/1999-10/msg00058.html - -I can reproduce this problem both with and without Tom's patch. Has -anyone seen this before? Maybe have a solution for it hanging around? -:) - -There's a test case for this documented at: - -when debugging threaded applications you get extra SIGTRAPs -http://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9565 - -[There should be a GDB testcase - cagney] - --- - -GDB5 TOT on unixware 7 -http://sourceware.cygnus.com/ml/gdb/2000-04/msg00119.html - -Robert Lipe writes: -> I just spun the top of tree of the GDB5 branch on UnixWare 7. As a -> practical matter, the current thread support is somewhat more annoying -> than when GDB was thread-unaware. - -- Language Support