Re: [RFA] Remote symbol look-up (resubmission)

Michael Snyder
2001-05-21T15:12:00Z

Andrew Cagney wrote:
>
> > Are you saying that there is going to need to be an extra parameter (the
> >> shared library name) added to the target->gdb symbol request on Solaris?
> >
> >
> > No, I'm saying it could potentially be useful to pass back the filename.
> > Not that I think it is necessary. The underlying mechanism that would
> > use this method on Solaris has a symbol-file-name argument. We don't
> > currently use it. Someday we might. Just keeping the option open.
>
> In that case I'd prefer at this point to leave the the symbol-file
> passing out. Instead just stick to a single simple qSymbol packet. The
> behavour would be:
>
> To start a transaction sequence:
>
> -> qSymbol
>
> It could even be:
>
> -> qSymbol::
>
> If you want simplicity and consistency.
>
> The reply would be as you proposed:
>
> <- ""
> Not recognized
> <- "OK"
> Recognized but not now
> <- <the-I-want-a-symbol-address>
> As you've described
>
> From then on it is:
>
> -> qSymbol:<addr>:<symbol>
>
> I don't think it is a good idea to try to include a mechanism for
> passing back and forth the name of an object file until there is a
> demonstrated need for such a feature.
>
> The reason for this is that, in the past GDB has incorporated what look
> like very reasonable idea's only to find that, when someone uses them,
> they are insufficient.

OK, Andrew, I will go along with your suggestions.