From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 32278 invoked by alias); 3 Jan 2002 20:58:12 -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 32215 invoked from network); 3 Jan 2002 20:58:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nevyn.them.org) (128.2.145.6) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 3 Jan 2002 20:58:04 -0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 16MEw5-0003R4-00; Thu, 03 Jan 2002 15:58:01 -0500 Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2002 12:58:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Andrew Cagney Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: A copy/save command ... Message-ID: <20020103155801.A12966@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Andrew Cagney , gdb@sources.redhat.com References: <3C341E2D.6050009@cygnus.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3C341E2D.6050009@cygnus.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.23i X-SW-Source: 2002-01/txt/msg00007.txt.bz2 On Thu, Jan 03, 2002 at 04:02:37AM -0500, Andrew Cagney wrote: > Hello, > > To toss out an idea. One of those oft mentioned missing features is a > command to read/write binary data to/from GDB's target memory. There is > the load command, but that works on object files (readable via BFD). > > Anyway, I've two vague thoughts on the syntax/semantics: > > 1. (gdb) copy > > The result of is written to the raw file. This expoits the > fact that GDB stores an expression in target form in host memory. > Consequently, the copy command just writes that raw data to the file. > > > 2. (gdb) copy
> or (gdb) copy/
> > or similar. A more traditional
/ approach. > ``copy/'' comes from ``x/''. > > > better suggestions welcome. Perhaps not the best name - we want to be able to both read and write, and it's not clear which way copy goes. I don't want to end up doing magic thinking that ``this looks like an address, not a filename'' to figure that out. Perhaps read/write? But that's still not clear which way is which. load/store would be perfect but load is already used. -- Daniel Jacobowitz Carnegie Mellon University MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer