From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19437 invoked by alias); 18 Feb 2003 21:26:59 -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 19430 invoked from network); 18 Feb 2003 21:26:58 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (172.16.49.200) by 172.16.49.205 with SMTP; 18 Feb 2003 21:26:58 -0000 Received: from redhat.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDCCF2D37; Tue, 18 Feb 2003 16:31:46 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <3E52A642.2010403@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 21:26:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20030217 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Kris Warkentin Cc: Daniel Jacobowitz , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: patch to add QNX NTO i386 support References: <01dd01c2d3aa$d4c1b1c0$0202040a@catdog> <20030213220751.GA15234@nevyn.them.org> <020c01c2d3ae$c7cb39b0$0202040a@catdog> <20030213222922.GA15783@nevyn.them.org> <000901c2d3ba$cb19aaf0$2a00a8c0@dash> <20030214000311.GA18154@nevyn.them.org> <003d01c2d3bd$b136bf30$2a00a8c0@dash> <20030214001316.GA18590@nevyn.them.org> <017c01c2d3c1$6196b210$2a00a8c0@dash> <3E4EBCF0.8070003@redhat.com> <20030217154403.GA16683@nevyn.them.org> <3E5111C7.5080708@redhat.com> <064301c2d6b6$0c381870$0202040a@catdog> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2003-02/txt/msg00382.txt.bz2 > Bingo. And it's also the way our ide talks to gdb. If the exec > > filename > >> >> >is >> >> >not set, gdb treats the first argument to run as the path to the file > > and > >> >> >subsequent arguments as regular args. > >> > > >> >> >> >> I don't think that change would be accepted into GDB. It makes `run' >> >> just too modal :-/ > >> > >> > >> > That was my first reaction too. But he's not describing a local change >> > to GDB - we already do this! Argh! > >> >> Yes, arrrg! Bug! > > > Why arrrgh? I know it makes run a little context sensitive but I don't > think anyone trips on it. The normal usage pattern of gdb precludes people > having problems with it and it's very useful for us. I still haven't heard > any suggestions of how we might accomplish what we do. In a single sentence, what does this command do? run /a/program Your answer cannot contain the word `if' :-) There are separate commands for specifying the program to be run. Perhaphs additional commands are needed. Andrew