From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2564 invoked by alias); 16 Jan 2006 21:01:59 -0000 Received: (qmail 2550 invoked by uid 22791); 16 Jan 2006 21:01:58 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from nevyn.them.org (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31.1) with ESMTP; Mon, 16 Jan 2006 21:01:56 +0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.54) id 1EybUA-0003Vm-VY; Mon, 16 Jan 2006 16:01:55 -0500 Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 21:01:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Mark Kettenis Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: RFC: target_create_inferior that does not call proceed Message-ID: <20060116210154.GA13437@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Mark Kettenis , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <20060116200238.GA11566@nevyn.them.org> <200601162058.k0GKwdqv010416@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200601162058.k0GKwdqv010416@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-01/txt/msg00200.txt.bz2 On Mon, Jan 16, 2006 at 09:58:39PM +0100, Mark Kettenis wrote: > > I'll be needing to run some additional common code fragments between > > creating an inferior and starting it, for an upcoming project. Like most of > > GDB they need the target to be stopped; that's why I separated the create > > and proceed phases here. > > That's the reason why you created post_create_inferior? If yes, then, > that answers the next question: Why did you introduce post_create_inferior? That's right. The followup patch I posted today calls solib functions from there. The followups I'll be working on later in the week will hook the "target properties" and "available register sets" bits I discussed on gdb@ (a long time ago now) into the same place. > I vaguely remember there was a way to do that already, but when I last > wanted to use it, I couldn't find a way to do it. So yes, I'd welcome > such a command. Perhaps we could have something like: > > (gdb) set stop-on-entry 1 > > after which "run" or "start" would stop at the entry point? Hrm, I'm not a big fan of state variables, but at least that's clearer than anything else I've thought of. I suppose we could also call the command create-inferior :-) -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery