From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3852 invoked by alias); 6 Jul 2006 16:34:43 -0000 Received: (qmail 3844 invoked by uid 22791); 6 Jul 2006 16:34:43 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from sadr.equallogic.com (HELO sadr.equallogic.com) (66.155.203.134) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Thu, 06 Jul 2006 16:34:40 +0000 Received: from sadr.equallogic.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by sadr.equallogic.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id k66GYcmO003943 for ; Thu, 6 Jul 2006 12:34:38 -0400 Received: from M31.equallogic.com (M31.equallogic.com [172.16.1.31]) by sadr.equallogic.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with SMTP id k66GYchb003938; Thu, 6 Jul 2006 12:34:38 -0400 Received: from pkoning.equallogic.com ([172.16.1.176]) by M31.equallogic.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.211); Thu, 6 Jul 2006 12:34:38 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <17581.15261.101388.267541@gargle.gargle.HOWL> Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2006 16:34:00 -0000 From: Paul Koning To: brendan@zen.org Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: cont vs run -- the real deal References: <44AD3A4E.3020105@zen.org> X-Mailer: VM 7.17 under 21.5 (beta27) "fiddleheads" XEmacs Lucid X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-07/txt/msg00014.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Brendan" == Brendan Kehoe writes: Brendan> Does there exist in writing an explanation of why "run" Brendan> works for native programs and "target sim" targets, but Brendan> "cont" is the correct approach for "target remote ..." ? Brendan> The docs I'm able to see, and the sources for the various Brendan> stubs and infcmd.c all seem to leave it implied somehow. With remote targets, you're connecting GDB to a program that has already been started (by some other means, done at the remote end). So you're gaining control afterwards, which means that you're going to continue from where it left off. The gdbserver case is a bit confusing: when you start an application via gdbserver, you're getting control on the first instruction. But it's still "after" the run, though well before main(). paul