From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrew Cagney To: Michael Snyder Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, jtc@redback.com Subject: Re: [RFC] Extend remote protocol to allow symbol look-up service. Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 16:40:00 -0000 Message-id: <3AE21A6E.EEFBF3CC@cygnus.com> References: <3ADCD1B8.772C5247@cygnus.com> X-SW-Source: 2001-04/msg00209.html Just FYI, Some quick comments on the protocol as it currently stands. I'd suggest waiting until the actual protocol spec has been resolved first though. Andrew -- > QSharedObject:libc.so.1 Given that the replies are: "" OK Some value I would strongly prefer the ``q'' packet over the ``Q'' packet (I think the latter is redundant :-). The ``q'' packet implicitly allows a value to be returned - which in turn gives the RPC mechanims that you're implementing. -- The symbol and file value is being passed as ascii text. I think they should be hex encoded so that we're 100% certain that they will never contain unprintable or protocol data. This was the rationale behind the qRcmd packet carrying HEX data. -- Is the protocol stateless? That is, would repeating the query: qSymbol::__pthread_max_threads always return the same value? Andrew