From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14635 invoked by alias); 2 Apr 2002 19:25:24 -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 14613 invoked from network); 2 Apr 2002 19:25:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nevyn.them.org) (128.2.145.6) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 2 Apr 2002 19:25:20 -0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 16sTuE-0006iq-00; Tue, 02 Apr 2002 14:25:22 -0500 Date: Tue, 02 Apr 2002 11:25:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Kris Warkentin Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: command api question Message-ID: <20020402142522.A25748@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Kris Warkentin , gdb@sources.redhat.com References: <082a01c1da77$5eda6920$b6010c0a@catdog> <20020402135525.A21141@nevyn.them.org> <083201c1da7b$bf19b490$b6010c0a@catdog> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <083201c1da7b$bf19b490$b6010c0a@catdog> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.23i X-SW-Source: 2002-04/txt/msg00005.txt.bz2 On Tue, Apr 02, 2002 at 02:22:36PM -0500, Kris Warkentin wrote: > Is that an agreeable solution? Or would it be better to just provide > get/set functions? We're hoping to get our changes rolled into the gdb head > branch someday and we want to keep things as clean as possible. (ie. as few > changes as possible to common files, most stuff implemented in separate qnx > files). Well, I also have a solib search path patch that I'd like to get rolled in. It's not in an appropriate form right now though. And I think there was a third in the list archives over a year ago, that met with some opposition. I'd really like to see the search path become (at least) compile-time default configurable... -- Daniel Jacobowitz Carnegie Mellon University MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer