sdb anomoly: a bug or not?

Thread View: comp.bugs.sys5

1 messages

[T] Back to Threads [V] Tree View [G] Group Articles

1 total messages Started by David F. Carlson Wed, 24 May 1989 19:20

#1131

Author: David F. Carlson
Date: Wed, 24 May 1989 19:20

11 lines
885 bytes

Under SV/386r3.0 sdb(1) used to allow a c(ontinue) over a pause(2) after
an interrupt was received.  (In other words, an interrupt while in a pause 
could be skipped and execution resumed *after* the pause.)  Under SV/386r3.2,
sdb(1) appears to *restart* the pause(2).  Is there a workaround to
allow one to pass the pause?  Is this a bug or a feature? :-)  

-- 
David F. Carlson, Micropen, Inc.
micropen!dave@ee.rochester.edu

"The faster I go, the behinder I get." --Lewis Carroll

Thread Navigation

This is a paginated view of messages in the thread with full content displayed inline.

Messages are displayed in chronological order, with the original post highlighted in green.

Use pagination controls to navigate through all messages in large threads.

Back to All Threads