From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20609 invoked by alias); 27 Feb 2003 19:02:15 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 20593 invoked from network); 27 Feb 2003 19:02:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hub.ott.qnx.com) (209.226.137.76) by 172.16.49.205 with SMTP; 27 Feb 2003 19:02:15 -0000 Received: from smtp.ott.qnx.com (smtp.ott.qnx.com [10.0.2.158]) by hub.ott.qnx.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA16073; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 13:49:53 -0500 Received: from catdog ([10.4.2.2]) by smtp.ott.qnx.com (8.8.8/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA11033; Mon, 17 Feb 2003 11:03:00 -0500 Message-ID: <059b01c2d69e$0a5fe9f0$0202040a@catdog> From: "Kris Warkentin" To: "Daniel Jacobowitz" , "Andrew Cagney" Cc: References: <01dd01c2d3aa$d4c1b1c0$0202040a@catdog> <20030213220751.GA15234@nevyn.them.org> <020c01c2d3ae$c7cb39b0$0202040a@catdog> <20030213222922.GA15783@nevyn.them.org> <000901c2d3ba$cb19aaf0$2a00a8c0@dash> <20030214000311.GA18154@nevyn.them.org> <003d01c2d3bd$b136bf30$2a00a8c0@dash> <20030214001316.GA18590@nevyn.them.org> <017c01c2d3c1$6196b210$2a00a8c0@dash> <3E4EBCF0.8070003@redhat.com> <20030217154403.GA16683@nevyn.them.org> Subject: Re: patch to add QNX NTO i386 support Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2003 19:02:00 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-SW-Source: 2003-02/txt/msg00774.txt.bz2 > > >Bingo. And it's also the way our ide talks to gdb. If the exec filename > > >is > > >not set, gdb treats the first argument to run as the path to the file and > > >subsequent arguments as regular args. > > > > I don't think that change would be accepted into GDB. It makes `run' > > just too modal :-/ > > That was my first reaction too. But he's not describing a local change > to GDB - we already do this! Argh! Yup. Serves you right for implementing something that comes in handy and that people use. ;-) Seriously though, I'd love to hear proposals for alternative methods of accomplishing this. We need to get symbols from a file on the host and then exec this file at an arbitrary path on the target. If you think about it, the current solution encapsulates that perfectly. Like I said though, I'd love to hear other ideas. BTW, Andrew, that HAVE_CONTINUABLE_WATCHPOINT patch....my current QNX patch which I'm about ready to submit, relies on it. I know you're busy but can you tell me if it's at least mostly okay so that I can tell whether or not I need to change my backend before I submit. cheers, Kris