From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22176 invoked by alias); 6 Nov 2003 19:41:53 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 22168 invoked from network); 6 Nov 2003 19:41:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (66.30.197.194) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 6 Nov 2003 19:41:53 -0000 Received: by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 469) id B76641A4291; Thu, 6 Nov 2003 14:41:52 -0500 (EST) From: Elena Zannoni MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <16298.41984.648877.777117@localhost.redhat.com> Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 19:41:00 -0000 To: Jim Ingham Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: filtering of commands during async operation In-Reply-To: <1623959A-1080-11D8-ABD7-000A277A8808@apple.com> References: <1068129153.32379.ezmlm@sources.redhat.com> <1623959A-1080-11D8-ABD7-000A277A8808@apple.com> X-SW-Source: 2003-11/txt/msg00054.txt.bz2 Jim Ingham writes: > The all the targets we support in Apple's version of gdb are async - > including the Mach-O native target. It took a bunch of mucking around > to get it working (and to get things like commands that run the target > working). And I am pretty sure that I broke the remote async in the > process, however, there were a couple of hacks in there (marked as such > in the code) that messed us up and I didn't have the patience at the > time to make both work... > > So I would need to do some clean-up before our code would be ready for > submission, but as a proof of concept it might be useful to folks, and > in our system it works pretty well. > It seems to have become some kind of a pattern that somebody other than Apple is going to merge Apple's changes with the FSF mainline. Is there any way to get another snapshot/tarball (like it was done in Dec 2001)? Maybe somebody will volunteer, even though this approach is suboptimal. elena > Jim > > On Nov 6, 2003, at 6:32 AM, gdb-digest-help@sources.redhat.com wrote: > > > Whoops. I agree, this is screwed up. I'll just make the fix now, no > > need to file a bug report. I am curious, did somebody get async > > native to work? So far there is only the remote async target. I do > > remember testing this, back 4 years ago, maybe the logic got turned > > around at some point. > > > > > _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_- > Jim Ingham > jingham@apple.com > Developer Tools - gdb