From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 372 invoked by alias); 10 Aug 2005 00:48:29 -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 354 invoked by uid 22791); 10 Aug 2005 00:48:21 -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, 10 Aug 2005 00:48:21 +0000 Received: from mailgate2.apple.com (a17-128-100-204.apple.com [17.128.100.204]) by mail-out4.apple.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j7A0mJ2H005232 for ; Tue, 9 Aug 2005 17:48:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay1.apple.com (relay1.apple.com) by mailgate2.apple.com (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.3.17) with ESMTP id ; Tue, 9 Aug 2005 17:48:19 -0700 Received: from [17.201.22.240] (inghji.apple.com [17.201.22.240]) by relay1.apple.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j7A0mHo7021484; Tue, 9 Aug 2005 17:48:17 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20050810004200.GB4264@nevyn.them.org> References: <1123605445.30442.ezmlm@sources.redhat.com> <20050809175159.GA3012@white> <20050809182320.GC3012@white> <20050810004200.GB4264@nevyn.them.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v733) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Message-Id: Cc: Bob Rossi , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Jim Ingham Subject: Re: RFC: MI output during program execution Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2005 00:48:00 -0000 To: Daniel Jacobowitz X-SW-Source: 2005-08/txt/msg00114.txt.bz2 On Aug 9, 2005, at 5:42 PM, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > On Tue, Aug 09, 2005 at 11:34:34AM -0700, Jim Ingham wrote: > >>> How does -interpreter-exec console work in the case when the user >>> executes a command, that makes up several other commands? >>> >>> define mess_with_mi_people >>> b main >>> r >>> n >>> n >>> end >>> >>> I don't think this case would currently work as expected. Would it? >>> >> >> Remember that only one "run the target" command is allowed in a CLI >> define. All the others are ignored. >> > > This is true (and documented, I think), but I still consider it a bug. > It's just a particularly rotten one. I agree, and it was filed as one by one of our users here... I looked a bit into what it would take to fix it and it was not pretty. Particularly for breakpoint commands, where it looked like it would require some serious surgery. Jim