Hi,
On Thu, 20 Nov 2014, Patrick Palka wrote:
> > -wrapper is specifically also for invoking cc1 with gdb from the
> > driver (that's the usecase documented with -wrapper), so it better
> > should work as intended. I don't know what problems Patrick had with
> > that, though. For me gcc -wra
On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 11:14 AM, Michael Matz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, 17 Nov 2014, Richard Biener wrote:
>
>> This means I can no longer interrupt a compile that is running too long?
>
> No, that's not what it means, cc1 will also get the SIGINT.
>
>> You should instead debug the actual compiler
Hi,
On Mon, 17 Nov 2014, Richard Biener wrote:
> This means I can no longer interrupt a compile that is running too long?
No, that's not what it means, cc1 will also get the SIGINT.
> You should instead debug the actual compiler, not the driver.
-wrapper is specifically also for invoking cc1
On Sat, 15 Nov 2014, Patrick Palka wrote:
> 1. if the top-level driver is waiting on a hanging subprocess,
> pressing ^C will kill the driver but it may not necessarily kill the
> subprocess; an unresponsive, perhaps busy-looping subprocess may be
> running in the background yet the compil
On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 5:23 AM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 16, 2014 at 2:01 AM, Patrick Palka wrote:
>> Currently the top-level driver handles SIGINT by immediately killing
>> itself even when the driver has subprocesses (e.g. cc1, as) running. I
>> don't think this is a good idea beca
On Nov 17, 2014, at 2:23 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 16, 2014 at 2:01 AM, Patrick Palka wrote:
>> Currently the top-level driver handles SIGINT by immediately killing
>> itself even when the driver has subprocesses (e.g. cc1, as) running. I
>> don't think this is a good idea because
Richard Biener writes:
> This means I can no longer interrupt a compile that is running too long?
The compiler will receive your interrupt as well, and die eventually,
unless it is blocked for some reason, in which case you will now notice
instead of leaving behind a lingering process.
Andreas.
On Sun, Nov 16, 2014 at 2:01 AM, Patrick Palka wrote:
> Currently the top-level driver handles SIGINT by immediately killing
> itself even when the driver has subprocesses (e.g. cc1, as) running. I
> don't think this is a good idea because
>
> 1. if the top-level driver is waiting on a hanging
On Sat, 15 Nov 2014, Patrick Palka wrote:
Currently the top-level driver handles SIGINT by immediately killing
itself even when the driver has subprocesses (e.g. cc1, as) running. I
don't think this is a good idea because
1. if the top-level driver is waiting on a hanging subprocess,
pressin
Currently the top-level driver handles SIGINT by immediately killing
itself even when the driver has subprocesses (e.g. cc1, as) running. I
don't think this is a good idea because
1. if the top-level driver is waiting on a hanging subprocess,
pressing ^C will kill the driver but it may not ne
10 matches
Mail list logo
