From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5195 invoked by alias); 23 Jan 2006 04:38:45 -0000 Received: (qmail 5187 invoked by uid 22791); 23 Jan 2006 04:38:44 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from romy.inter.net.il (HELO romy.inter.net.il) (192.114.186.66) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Mon, 23 Jan 2006 04:38:42 +0000 Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 (IGLD-84-228-162-108.inter.net.il [84.228.162.108]) by romy.inter.net.il (MOS 3.7.3-GA) with ESMTP id DKL57342 (AUTH halo1); Mon, 23 Jan 2006 06:38:38 +0200 (IST) Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 04:38:00 -0000 Message-Id: From: Eli Zaretskii To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org In-reply-to: <20060122201759.GA28863@nevyn.them.org> (message from Daniel Jacobowitz on Sun, 22 Jan 2006 15:17:59 -0500) Subject: Re: RFC: Clean up "show remote" Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii References: <20060122201759.GA28863@nevyn.them.org> X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-01/txt/msg00316.txt.bz2 > Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 15:17:59 -0500 > From: Daniel Jacobowitz > > Does anyone have an opinion on this patch? It's, um, a bit inelegant; > but it removes the hardcoded list of subcommands in show_remote_cmd, which > happens to be missing two. I always try "show remote" when I want to > remember the spelling of "set remote hardware-breakpoint-limit", but > it didn't include that. This patch is fine with me, in general. > Also shorten the messages a bit by removing redundancy; either the user > typed config->title, or it was prefixed to the output already. I'm not quite sure I get this. With the current code, "show remote" outputs lines like this: Support for remote protocol `Z0' (software-breakpoint) packet is auto-detected, currently unknown. With your change, the part in parentheses will not be displayed, so how would the user know that Z0 is a packet that sets software breakpoints? > An alternative if the code in show_remote_cmd is too ugly would be to delete > "show remote Z-packet". I think we have to leave "set remote Z-packet" - > it's five years obsoleted but never marked as deprecated and I know people > are continuing to use it - but the show command is completely redundant. I think what you did is fine, but perhaps explain a bit more in comments about why Z-packet is redundant, and that maybe it should be removed later on.