From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28367 invoked by alias); 27 Jul 2009 01:52:09 -0000 Received: (qmail 28355 invoked by uid 22791); 27 Jul 2009 01:52:07 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from viper.snap.net.nz (HELO viper.snap.net.nz) (202.37.101.25) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 27 Jul 2009 01:52:01 +0000 Received: from totara (221.27.255.123.static.snap.net.nz [123.255.27.221]) by viper.snap.net.nz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3FB603DA05C; Mon, 27 Jul 2009 13:51:58 +1200 (NZST) Received: by totara (Postfix, from userid 1000) id E83AFC15A; Mon, 27 Jul 2009 13:51:56 +1200 (NZST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <19053.2107.342469.683795@totara.tehura.co.nz> Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2009 01:52:00 -0000 To: tromey@redhat.com Cc: "Marc Khouzam" , Subject: Re: [RFC] Queries and frontends In-Reply-To: References: <6D19CA8D71C89C43A057926FE0D4ADAA07C00023@ecamlmw720.eamcs.ericsson.se> <19045.23703.743876.775308@totara.tehura.co.nz> From: nickrob@snap.net.nz (Nick Roberts) X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2009-07/txt/msg00210.txt.bz2 > Nick> Here's a revised patch for my original request. It doesn't help > Nick> with issues relating to GDB/MI but just uses the "server prefix" > Nick> instead of a special option. > > My initial reaction to this was to think that defaulted_query should > respect server_command. Is there a case where this would do the wrong > thing? I don't quite follow. AFAIK defaulted_query knows nothing about server_command. I guess it would be possible to make GDB never query when the server prefix is used but the long term goal is to remove annotations. I'm just proposing that "record stop" doesn't need confirmation when the server prefix is used. Since "record stop" is new to GDB 7.0 that won't break/change existing behaviour so I don't see how it can do the wrong thing if it's properly implemented. Hui has suggested adding a special command but I don't understand how his proposed "maintenance print target-stack" relates to queries. -- Nick http://www.inet.net.nz/~nickrob