From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 31284 invoked by alias); 9 Oct 2006 04:33:09 -0000 Received: (qmail 31268 invoked by uid 22791); 9 Oct 2006 04:33:07 -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, 09 Oct 2006 04:33:05 +0000 Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 (IGLD-84-228-214-199.inter.net.il [84.228.214.199]) by romy.inter.net.il (MOS 3.7.3-GA) with ESMTP id FYQ18413 (AUTH halo1); Mon, 9 Oct 2006 06:33:00 +0200 (IST) Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2006 04:33:00 -0000 Message-Id: From: Eli Zaretskii To: Jan Kratochvil CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org In-reply-to: <20061008190239.GA29584@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> (message from Jan Kratochvil on Sun, 8 Oct 2006 21:02:39 +0200) Subject: Re: [patch] IPv6 support for gdbserver Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii References: <20060927163337.GA27149@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> <20060927182038.GA5635@nevyn.them.org> <20060927185547.GA13544@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> <20060927190611.GA7326@nevyn.them.org> <20060930152757.GA27372@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> <20061008190239.GA29584@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> 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: 2006-10/txt/msg00074.txt.bz2 > Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2006 21:02:39 +0200 > From: Jan Kratochvil > Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org > > patch for the IPv6 support according to the Daniel Jacobowitz's recommendation: > http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2006-09/msg00194.html Thanks. I have a few comments about the documentation patch: > -@item target remote @code{@var{host}:@var{port}} > +@item target remote @code{@var{host}:@var{port}} This just changes whitespace; please don't. > +@code{tcp6:} prefix forces IPv6 network connection while @code{tcp4:} forces Please say ``The @code{tcp6:} prefix forces IPv6 network ...''. > +@code{udp6:} prefix forces IPv6 network connection while @code{udp4:} forces Same here. > +@var{comm} is either a device name (to use a serial line) or file descriptions > +numbers or a TCP hostname and portnumber. For example, to debug Emacs with the A better way of putting it would be @var{comm} is a device name (to use a serial line), a file descriptor, or a TCP hostname and portnumber. > -The only difference from the previous example is the first argument, > -specifying that you are communicating with the host @value{GDBN} via > -TCP. The @samp{host:2345} argument means that @code{gdbserver} is to > -expect a TCP connection from machine @samp{host} to local TCP port 2345. > -(Currently, the @samp{host} part is ignored.) You can choose any number > -you want for the port number as long as it does not conflict with any > -TCP ports already in use on the target system (for example, @code{23} is > -reserved for @code{telnet}).@footnote{If you choose a port number that > -conflicts with another service, @code{gdbserver} prints an error message > -and exits.} You must use the same port number with the host @value{GDBN} > -@code{target remote} command. Why did you drop this part? > +This example still debugs the same program just in this case it is specifying > +that you are communicating with the host @value{GDBN} via TCP. > +The @code{gdbserver} specific part @code{fd34} directs @code{gdbserver} to use > +already preopened file descriptor 3 for @value{GDBN} remote serial protocol > +input and file descriptor 4 for the protocol output. As the format is > +@code{fd} you cannot specify file descriptors numbers > +above 9. First, please use @var{} instead of <..>, as in @code{fd@var{c1}@var{c2}} (I find too lengthy). And second, isn't there a better way of specifying two descriptors? I find the "fdNM" method inelegant, and the limitation of a single-digit descriptor it requires too high a price to pay. I hope we can come up with a better method. > +You can choose any port number you want (@code{2345} here) as long as it does > +not conflict with any TCP ports already in use on the target system (for > +example, @code{23} is reserved for @code{telnet}).@footnote{If you choose > +a port number that conflicts with another service, @code{socat} prints an error > +message and exits.} You must use the same port number with the host > +@value{GDBN} @code{target remote} command. > + > +On IPv4 networks you may also run @code{gdbserver} directly, without the > +@code{socat} helper there (equivalent command to the example above): > + > +@smallexample > +target> gdbserver :2345 emacs foo.txt > +@end smallexample The example (and the sentence that precedes it) should be before the descriptive text, otherwise the text doesn't make sense. > * gdb.texinfo (Using the gdbserver program): Remove "host:port". Why? I think back-compatibility is important.