From: Michael Snyder <msnyder@redhat.com>
To: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com>
Cc: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@cygnus.com>,
thorpej@wasabisystems.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Use multi-arch'd START_INFERIOR_TRAPS_EXPECTED on Alpha target
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 14:29:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3CC8726A.D93DA309@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20020425160400.A19216@nevyn.them.org>
Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
>
> On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 08:06:31PM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> > >The following puts STARTUP_WITH_SHELL
> >
> > Hmm, HP merge. An intermediate version looked like:
> >
> > /* If STARTUP_WITH_SHELL is set, GDB's "run"
> > ! * will attempts to start up the debugee under a shell.
> > ! * This is in order for argument-expansion to occur. E.g.,
> > ! * (gdb) run *
> > ! * The "*" gets expanded by the shell into a list of files.
> > ! * While this is a nice feature, it turns out to interact badly
> > ! * with some of the catch-fork/catch-exec features we have added.
> > ! * In particular, if the shell does any fork/exec's before
> > ! * the exec of the target program, that can confuse GDB.
> > ! * To disable this feature, set STARTUP_WITH_SHELL to 0.
> > ! * To enable this feature, set STARTUP_WITH_SHELL to 1.
> > ! * The catch-exec traps expected during start-up will
> > ! * be 1 if target is not started up with a shell, 2 if it is.
> > ! * - RT
> > ! */
> > #define STARTUP_WITH_SHELL 1
> > - #define START_INFERIOR_TRAPS_EXPECTED (STARTUP_WITH_SHELL + 1)
> >
> > Does STARTUP_WITH_SHELL need to be multi-arched?
> >
> > I'm wondering if it would be better to make it a variable (``set
> > startup-with-shell <boolean>''). Looking at its uses it appears that
> > fork-child.c:startup_inferior() would still work (if it did previously).
>
> Silly question.... are there any (supported? working?) uses for this
> besides globbing and backtick interpolation? I think there aren't, and
> I think it would simplify GDB to just have a function which called
> glob() and invoked subshells for ``. It's a little tricky, but not
> very. We'd lose access to things like shell-specific globbing tricks,
> but I think that's a worthwhile price to pay.
I'm not so sure. Sometimes getting the exact behavior of a specific
shell might be important. Also, might this functionality be used
for piping and I/O redirection?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-04-25 21:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-04-21 18:15 Jason R Thorpe
2002-04-24 17:06 ` Andrew Cagney
2002-04-24 17:45 ` Jason R Thorpe
2002-04-24 18:04 ` Jason R Thorpe
2002-04-24 19:30 ` Andrew Cagney
2002-04-25 13:03 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2002-04-25 14:29 ` Michael Snyder [this message]
2002-04-25 15:00 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=3CC8726A.D93DA309@redhat.com \
--to=msnyder@redhat.com \
--cc=ac131313@cygnus.com \
--cc=drow@mvista.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com \
--cc=thorpej@wasabisystems.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox