Re: patch to add QNX NTO i386 support

[Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com>]

On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 11:02:58AM -0500, Kris Warkentin wrote:
> > > >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.

"set remote exec-path"?  Except that's not quite accurate, because the
normal remote protocol doesn't support it.  Maybe "set nto exec-path",
since it'd only be used by remote-nto.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer