Re: [PATCH 1/2] gdb: introduce command "info architecture"

[Guinevere Larsen <guinevere@redhat.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1643 bytes --]

On 11/7/25 12:51 PM, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:
> On Fri, 7 Nov 2025, Guinevere Larsen wrote:
>
>>> Or am I missing something?  Of course adding filtering might be useful,
>>> especially if the list so large as in my quoted example, but the change
>>> description suggests there's no listing facility available.
>> Well, I wouldn't say we have a listing facility. using Set Architecture
>> without an argument may list them, but that is an error message, rather than a
>> command to do that, which is why I don't think it is a convenient way to tell
>> a user to check for support. You could achieve the same if you asked for
>> completion, but again, not a "listing facility" in the sense of telling a user
>> to check.
>   We could reword output from `set architecture' so as not to suggest the
> use without an argument is invalid.
>
>   In any case the listing facility must not be an `info' subcommand, as
> these are meant for showing the state of the debuggee,

I disagree, in my opinion, this new command would function basically 
just like "info unwinder", giving information on how GDB is able to 
interact with the inferior.

>   while the set of
> architectures supported is a property of the given instance of GDB itself,
> and therefore suitable for the `set'/`show' commands.  So if a new command
> it would have to be `show architecture list' or suchlike.

My understanding is that set/show commands are mostly used for when the 
user could change something, and the point of this command is showing 
the user the compilation options that were used, there's no changes that 
a user could do.

-- 
Cheers,
Guinevere Larsen
It/she

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2561 bytes --]