Re: [RFC] Share the shared library list between inferiors

[Pedro Alves <pedro@codesourcery.com>]

On Monday 03 November 2008 14:29:20, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 11:29:04PM +0000, Pedro Alves wrote:
> > There are several ways to skin this cat.  This one seemed like
> > the smallest, most extensible and malleable one from GDB's side, because
> > it doesn't cast to stone any new protocol extension --- which may
> > prove limited to some systems (some memory regions shared, others not;
> > some shared but visible at different addresses in different
> > inferiors/cores, etc.).  I was hoping we'd cross that bridge when
> > we start seeing those systems reporting multi process support
> > to GDB.
> > 
> > What do people think about this?
> 
> I have one request.  Could you expand the comment to mention the other
> properties you're associating with this flag?
> 
> Global breakpoints and a single common target description don't
> obviously follow from "global shared library list".

Certainly!  Sorry about that.  That came from the fact that feature
implementation having had several dressings over time, and I guess
I had just started seeing through the name.

I could also rename the gdbarch method to something like
gdbarch_code_is_shared_between_processes, if you'd like (although
it sounds a bit long of a name).

-- 
Pedro Alves