From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 31823 invoked by alias); 16 Jun 2003 23:46:01 -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 31807 invoked from network); 16 Jun 2003 23:45:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 16 Jun 2003 23:45:59 -0000 Received: from int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (nat-pool-rdu-dmz.redhat.com [172.16.52.200] (may be forged)) by mx1.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h5GNjwH01851 for ; Mon, 16 Jun 2003 19:45:59 -0400 Received: from potter.sfbay.redhat.com (potter.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.27.15]) by int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h5GNjuT17465; Mon, 16 Jun 2003 19:45:56 -0400 Received: from redhat.com (reddwarf.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.24.50]) by potter.sfbay.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h5GNjtK24485; Mon, 16 Jun 2003 16:45:55 -0700 Message-ID: <3EEE56B3.F52E29AE@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2003 23:46:00 -0000 From: Michael Snyder Organization: Red Hat, Inc. X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Daniel Jacobowitz CC: Paul Koning , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: RFA: "disconnect" command References: <20030614042642.GA28231@nevyn.them.org> <16109.50758.138766.451235@pkoning.dev.equallogic.com> <20030616134103.GA17403@nevyn.them.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2003-06/txt/msg00550.txt.bz2 Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 16, 2003 at 09:29:42AM -0400, Paul Koning wrote: > > >>>>> "Daniel" == Daniel Jacobowitz writes: > > > > Daniel> This patch got tabled shortly before 5.3, due to bad timing > > Daniel> on my part. Now here we are coming up on 6.0 and my timing's > > Daniel> no better... this is the first of several old patches that I > > Daniel> would like to see included in 6.0, assuming I get the time to > > Daniel> revisit them all. > > > > Daniel> Refresher on this one: the patch adds a "disconnect" commad, > > Daniel> and implements it for remote targets. "disconnect" leaves > > Daniel> the target stopped, while "detach" usually resumes it. > > Daniel> Useful with kgdb, gdbserver, et cetera. > > > > Useful indeed. But there is nothing in the names "detach" and > > "disconnect" that suggests how they differ. Would it be possible to > > have command names that are suggestive of their action? > > The last time I proposed this, we went back and forth for a week on > names and this was the best we could come up with. Have you got a > better suggestion? It seems we never converge on names. ;-) Especially new names for existing commands. If you change the name of detach, you will have to keep the old name around. "Detach" does suggest resume, if you're from a unix background. "Disconnect" does not. I suggest that these names are adequate.