From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26374 invoked by alias); 5 Jan 2005 01:53:38 -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 26261 invoked from network); 5 Jan 2005 01:53:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lakermmtao11.cox.net) (68.230.240.28) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 5 Jan 2005 01:53:24 -0000 Received: from white ([68.9.64.121]) by lakermmtao11.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.04.00 201-2131-117-20041022) with ESMTP id <20050105015323.CLZK1657.lakermmtao11.cox.net@white>; Tue, 4 Jan 2005 20:53:23 -0500 Received: from bob by white with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1Cm0MV-0006hK-00; Tue, 04 Jan 2005 20:53:23 -0500 Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2005 01:53:00 -0000 From: Bob Rossi To: Jim Ingham Cc: Alain Magloire , Eli Zaretskii , Andrew Cagney , nick@nick.uklinux.net, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: MI handshaking Message-ID: <20050105015323.GC25675@white> Mail-Followup-To: Jim Ingham , Alain Magloire , Eli Zaretskii , Andrew Cagney , nick@nick.uklinux.net, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <20041117173205.GA5350@white> <200411180135.UAA14730@smtp.ott.qnx.com> <20041119192313.GA2202@white> <20050105013617.GB25675@white> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i X-SW-Source: 2005-01/txt/msg00021.txt.bz2 On Tue, Jan 04, 2005 at 05:50:41PM -0800, Jim Ingham wrote: > > On Jan 4, 2005, at 5:36 PM, Bob Rossi wrote: > > >> > >>I've been very busy, so sorry about the delay. > >> > >>I'll look into what we discussed here and come up with something that > >>fits all the new needs. Does Jim care about any of this? > > I didn't see this question in the original note. The answer is we > always ship the Developer Tools as a whole package, which includes > Xcode & gdb, and just ask for the mi version we know it supports > explicitly. We don't support taking one version of gdb & using it > under an older or newer version of Xcode. I don't see any plans for us > to separate the two in the forseeable future. So while I do care about > this in an abstract sort of way, I can't see us using it. > > > > > >Sorry about the delay. > > > >I plan on getting at least this patch into GDB. So, to recap, I neede > >to add > >a new mi-command that would output all of the info discovered during > >the > >handshaking phase. Is there anything else that needs to be added? > > > > Xcode does use the "does this command exist" mi command Jason mentioned > in a few places. This was more for the convenience of the Xcode > developers - so they could ask me to implement a command, then sketch > out the implementation right away without having to wait for me to > implement it. That is the level of handshaking that we do. Thanks for the info, that sounds usefull. Is it available? Thanks, Bob Rossi