From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6301 invoked by alias); 10 Mar 2010 23:30:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 6293 invoked by uid 22791); 10 Mar 2010 23:30:48 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail.codesourcery.com (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (38.113.113.100) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 10 Mar 2010 23:30:43 +0000 Received: (qmail 24760 invoked from network); 10 Mar 2010 23:30:42 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO caradoc.them.org) (dan@127.0.0.2) by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 10 Mar 2010 23:30:42 -0000 Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2010 23:30:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Pierre Muller Cc: 'Pedro Alves' , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PING] [RFC-v3] Add windows Thread Information Block Message-ID: <20100310233035.GA2056@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Pierre Muller , 'Pedro Alves' , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <000901c9f5ef$4ee06f10$eca14d30$@u-strasbg.fr> <20090703194220.GA30668@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> <002901cac075$1f8f44b0$5eadce10$@muller@ics-cnrs.unistra.fr> <201003101725.48298.pedro@codesourcery.com> <000c01cac0a0$3935fbe0$aba1f3a0$@muller@ics-cnrs.unistra.fr> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <000c01cac0a0$3935fbe0$aba1f3a0$@muller@ics-cnrs.unistra.fr> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2010-03/txt/msg00402.txt.bz2 On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 11:22:51PM +0100, Pierre Muller wrote: > OK, I start to remember now, > you said that TARGET_OBJECT_DATA should use xml syntax for > all data transmission, what that it? My two cents... the issue isn't that you aren't using XML, but that you're using TARGET_OBJECT_OSDATA. That's for information about the operating system, like the list of all running processes, not about the current process. Pedro, this raises an interesting question. Suppose Pierre added a new qXfer object. How would he indicate to a remote target which process's object was requested? This may be something already handled, but I don't know the answer. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery