From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18968 invoked by alias); 25 Jul 2002 15:46:26 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 18943 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2002 15:46:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (216.138.202.10) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 25 Jul 2002 15:46:25 -0000 Received: from ges.redhat.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33E903E0D; Thu, 25 Jul 2002 11:46:24 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <3D401D50.4030009@ges.redhat.com> Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 09:17:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:1.0.0) Gecko/20020708 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Daniel Jacobowitz Cc: Tom Tromey , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: RFA: >, >>, and "tee" operators References: <20020723183956.GA28558@nevyn.them.org> <871y9ub6fj.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <20020723192325.GA30738@nevyn.them.org> <87d6te8a6o.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <20020723202051.GA5427@nevyn.them.org> <3D3F5BDF.2050209@ges.redhat.com> <20020725031026.GA20117@nevyn.them.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2002-07/txt/msg00509.txt.bz2 > Does the `transcript FILE' command send both the user input (prompts?) >> and output to the file (output also to the console)? Like unix script? > > > [Speaking for my patch] > > Nope. Prompts and user input are not logged. Output goes only to a > file. Something like `script' might be useful but that's a patch for > another day. My understanding of a transcript is that it records all details of the exchange - both input and output. Unless the command is recording the input, I don't think it should be called ``transcript''. The name ``transcript'' came about (I think) from an earlier discussion where a command to record both input and output was proposed. See: http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view%20audit-trail&database=gdb&pr=114 for its bug report. > > I guess the corresponding ``tee FILE'' command just writes output? > > > Output goes to the file and to the normal output channel. Still no > prompts or input. Ok. > I think there is also a need for a tempoary redirection. So I guess >> either the obscure: >> >FILE ... >> maybe? >> log FILE ..... > > > How about "transcript FILE "? There's some quoting badness but > for the moment I'm willing to just disallow spaces in the filename. > Much more straightforward that way. (See above for problem I see with the name ``transcript''.) For whitespace in filenames, see: http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view%20audit-trail&database=gdb&pr=535 So yes, you get to use strchr (' ') .... :-( > GDB's option identifier is ``/'' and not ``-''. See the print/ >> commands. ``-'' has the problem of being a valid expression operator. >> I should note that the current parser is pretty broken. It can't >> differentiate between: >> transcript/f >> transcript /f >> (sigh) but that is a fixable problem. > > > GDB's option identifier varies, actually; symbol-file -readnow, > add-symbol-file -s
are the only two I see offhand. > We only use / for print format characters. Mostly we just drop them > all on one line. > > I'd rather stick with '-' as it's more familiar to most of our > audience, particularly with 'tee -a'. I think this was raised before (fernando and I discussed it somewhere on gdb@). GDB is used on systems that are not even UNIX like (namely DJGPP), trying to tie the syntax to UNIX is such a good idea. GDB needs a syntax spec, the current piece meal aproach is regrettable :-( If the command was called ``log'' rather than ``tee'' then I don't think we would have problems with ``log -a''. (I'm not saying that log is the right name mind.) enjoy, Andrew