From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 30478 invoked by alias); 10 Apr 2003 21:56:00 -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 30471 invoked from network); 10 Apr 2003 21:55:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO crack.them.org) (65.125.64.184) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 10 Apr 2003 21:55:59 -0000 Received: from nevyn.them.org ([66.93.61.169] ident=mail) by crack.them.org with asmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 193k1d-00048U-00; Thu, 10 Apr 2003 16:56:05 -0500 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 193k1U-0008Fw-00; Thu, 10 Apr 2003 17:55:56 -0400 Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 21:56:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Andrew Cagney Cc: Jim Blandy , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: RFA/RFC: dump symtab and psymtab lists Message-ID: <20030410215555.GA31482@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Andrew Cagney , Jim Blandy , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <3E927CAF.1080704@redhat.com> <3E933B62.8090607@redhat.com> <3E94D283.7060308@redhat.com> <3E95E6D7.6030207@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3E95E6D7.6030207@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i X-SW-Source: 2003-04/txt/msg00218.txt.bz2 On Thu, Apr 10, 2003 at 05:49:11PM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote: > >Andrew Cagney writes: > > > >>> Could you suggest a way I can provide the utility I need, without > >>> introducing an unnecessary inconsistency? I'm not sure what you're > >>> looking for. > > > >> > >>Some level of consistency with the rest of the CLI (which isn't easy). > >> > > > >>> How about 'maint print symtabs [-matching REGEXP] [outfile]'? > > > >> > >>maint grep > >>maint search
> > > > > >Okay, here's a revised patch that calls them "maint list {,p}symtab". > > Unfortunatly, there is `(gdb) list' command, so one would expect a > certain level of correspondance between `(gdb) list' and `(gdb maint > list'. This is like `(gdb) info breakpoints' vs `(gdb) maint info > breakpoints'. > > This also rules out my `maint search' suggestion :-( > `maint query '? > > >Perhaps commands that produce so much output that they need to be able > >to send it to a file should be renamed to "maint dump"? > > True. I think this is an excellent idea. It does point out that expecting the correspondence may be unwise. We already have both print and dump. -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer