From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 53089 invoked by alias); 22 Mar 2016 13:16:11 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 53070 invoked by uid 89); 22 Mar 2016 13:16:10 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=Hx-languages-length:1509 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Tue, 22 Mar 2016 13:16:09 +0000 Received: from int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.27]) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A7E354AD7D for ; Tue, 22 Mar 2016 13:16:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from host1.jankratochvil.net (ovpn-116-22.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.116.22]) by int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id u2MDG4HJ024612 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 22 Mar 2016 09:16:07 -0400 Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2016 13:16:00 -0000 From: Jan Kratochvil To: Pedro Alves Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Gary Benson Subject: Re: [patch] Suggest newer gdbserver if it has no qXfer:exec-file:read Message-ID: <20160322131604.GA24312@host1.jankratochvil.net> References: <20160319201842.GA16540@host1.jankratochvil.net> <56F13963.9040204@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <56F13963.9040204@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2016-03/txt/msg00458.txt.bz2 On Tue, 22 Mar 2016 13:24:03 +0100, Pedro Alves wrote: > On 03/19/2016 08:18 PM, Jan Kratochvil wrote: > > if (packet_support (PACKET_qXfer_exec_file) != PACKET_ENABLE) > >- return NULL; > >+ { > >+ warning (_("No executable has been specified (see the \"file\" command) " > >+ "and remote gdbserver does not " > >+ "support packet \"qXfer:exec-file:read\"" > >+ " - please use FSF gdbserver version 7.10 or later.")); > >+ return NULL; > >+ } > > I think this will print the warning after connecting to any > random stub, not just gdbserver. Won't it be confusing > to suggest FSF gdbserver in that case? (1) I think this message can only appear during a mistake. Is it right? In fact this is my primary concern with this patch. In such case I find any info better than no info. (2) Still it may suggest they could for example implement qXfer:exec-file:read in their gdbserver stub if appropriate. I believe that people who use custom gdbserver stub are more aware of how to fix it than normal (=desktop/enterprise) OS developers who just try to debug some programs. (3) Do you have a better idea? One could add "if approproate" in that message but I find that excessive. One could detect FSF gdbserver (if possible, I do not think it is, BTW it could be good to identify variant+version of gdbserver over the protocol) but then still if it either is or is not a FSF gdbserver that message may be relevant in some cases. Thanks, Jan