Re: [RFA] Async mode fixes.

[Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>]

On Sun, Mar 09, 2008 at 09:36:15AM +1300, Nick Roberts wrote:
> I think the command "target async" is a bit misleading and it should really be
> called "target remote-async" (I'm not really suggesting changing it).

I agree that the name is misleading.  Also, it's not documented, and
we can be pretty sure that no one uses it.  So I think we can rename
it if we want - and what I really want is to get rid of it entirely.

> My changes aren't just for Linux, but an exec target.  I mean native debugging
> (I think) with just one implementation - linux.  It sounds like I'm inflating
> what I've done but other native targets can presumably be adapted to make use
> of the changes in inf-ptrace.c, exec.c etc.

I think you mean "child" target?  target exec just reads an exec file
on disk.

> If all targets could run asynchronously, then it seems that that mode should
> be specified at startup:
> 
>    gdb --async myprog

Can it just be the default, once we get it working?  If I understand
correctly, the async-ness of the target should not affect the CLI at
all.  It lets you use "continue&" in addition to "continue", but
existing commands should keep working as before.

Async mode seems inherently superior.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery