This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [PATCH v2] Improved ^c support for gdb/guile
- From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu dot org>
- To: Doug Evans <xdje42 at gmail dot com>
- Cc: gdb-patches at sourceware dot org, guile-devel at gnu dot org
- Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2014 23:13:57 +0200
- Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] Improved ^c support for gdb/guile
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <wrbvbwejihe dot fsf at sspiff dot org> <wrbr471jxjg dot fsf at sspiff dot org> <834n3x8o7m dot fsf at gnu dot org> <CAP9bCMSE+vNpG2nJNKNQk3QfQHV=cqRdEGmv7T3eEcgQ0cTyFQ at mail dot gmail dot com>
- Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu dot org>
> Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2014 12:59:22 -0800
> From: Doug Evans <xdje42@gmail.com>
> Cc: "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>, guile-devel@gnu.org
>
> >> +void
> >> +gdbscm_initialize_sigint (void)
> >> +{
> >> + siscm_sigint_pipe[0] = siscm_sigint_pipe[1] = -1;
> >> +
> >> + if (!SCM_USE_PTHREAD_THREADS)
> >> + {
> >> + warning (_("Guile does not have pthreads support."));
> >> + warning (_("Proper SIGINT handling for Guile will be unavailable."));
> >> + return;
> >> + }
> >
> > The above is what worries me. Guile currently doesn't work in the
> > native MinGW build if configured with threads (it crashes, hangs,
> > etc.). Can't we have decent SIGINT handling without pthreads?
>
> With 2.0.x, no.
> I'm ok with changing the warning, e.g., not printing it at all on
> systems where it would otherwise always be printed, and instead
> documenting the issue for such systems.
>
> The downside is that while Scheme code is running SIGINT is ignored
> (unless one is in the repl, or sets up a SIGINT handler oneself).
Ignored why? because GDB sets the handler to SIG_IGN? Or for some
other reason?