From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21987 invoked by alias); 12 Jan 2002 00:25:55 -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 21946 invoked from network); 12 Jan 2002 00:25:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nevyn.them.org) (128.2.145.6) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 12 Jan 2002 00:25:54 -0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 16PBzg-0004jz-00 for ; Fri, 11 Jan 2002 19:25:56 -0500 Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 16:25:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFA] New command "info proc" for Linux Message-ID: <20020111192556.A18131@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <200201102008.g0AK8p112983@reddwarf.cygnus.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200201102008.g0AK8p112983@reddwarf.cygnus.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.23i X-SW-Source: 2002-01/txt/msg00314.txt.bz2 On Thu, Jan 10, 2002 at 12:08:51PM -0800, Michael Snyder wrote: > > What do you Linux guys think of this? It's modelled after the info > proc command from procfs.c, but uses/exposes the /proc information > available on Linux. Do you see any architecture/portability issues? Not offhand - I like it. Someday I hope to be able to get this from gdbserver, too. I would have killed for it over the past week. -- Daniel Jacobowitz Carnegie Mellon University MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer