From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11792 invoked by alias); 17 Aug 2005 00:37:23 -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 11725 invoked by uid 22791); 17 Aug 2005 00:37:06 -0000 Received: from mail-out4.apple.com (HELO mail-out4.apple.com) (17.254.13.23) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with ESMTP; Wed, 17 Aug 2005 00:37:06 +0000 Received: from mailgate1.apple.com (a17-128-100-225.apple.com [17.128.100.225]) by mail-out4.apple.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j7H0b3kI028835 for ; Tue, 16 Aug 2005 17:37:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay3.apple.com (relay3.apple.com) by mailgate1.apple.com (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.3.17) with ESMTP id for ; Tue, 16 Aug 2005 17:37:03 -0700 Received: from [17.201.22.240] (inghji.apple.com [17.201.22.240]) by relay3.apple.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j7H0b1qp000847 for ; Tue, 16 Aug 2005 17:37:02 -0700 (PDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v733) In-Reply-To: <1124238360.5670.ezmlm@sources.redhat.com> References: <1124238360.5670.ezmlm@sources.redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Message-Id: <6C1EAFFF-0F76-43C9-AAD7-A6A143D9C3D2@apple.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Jim Ingham Subject: Re: RFC: MI output during program execution Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2005 01:10:00 -0000 To: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com X-SW-Source: 2005-08/txt/msg00195.txt.bz2 Note that for a truly asynchronous target, what you get is: (gdb) -exec-continue ^running (gdb) -exec-status ^done,status="running" (gdb) -exec-interrupt ^done,reason="signal-received",signal-name="SIGINT",signal- meaning="Interrupt",thread-id="1" (gdb) Or something like that... So in that case the ^running really is the equivalent of the ^done... Jim On Aug 16, 2005, at 5:26 PM, gdb-patches-digest- help@sources.redhat.com wrote: > > > Yeah - I'm beginning to think that we should use this: > > (gdb) > -exec-continue > *running > ^done > (gdb) > > Instead of the current: > > (gdb) > -exec-continue > ^running > (gdb) > > It'd definitely have to be mi3 only, though! This would be a pretty > big change that frontends would have to adapt to. > > The asymmetry between ^running and *stopped will bite us here. For > instance, for a CLI command, I'd want roughly: > > (gdb) > -interpreter-exec console "continue" > *running > ^done > (gdb) > > Anyway, food for thought. > > -- > Daniel Jacobowitz > CodeSourcery, LLC >