From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16336 invoked by alias); 25 Apr 2002 18:59:43 -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 16329 invoked from network); 25 Apr 2002 18:59:42 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nevyn.them.org) (128.2.145.6) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 25 Apr 2002 18:59:42 -0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 170oSv-0004As-00; Thu, 25 Apr 2002 14:59:37 -0400 Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 11:59:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Andrew Cagney Cc: Eli Zaretskii , chanskw@ca.ibm.com, gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Questions about GDB-MI Interface Message-ID: <20020425145937.B15797@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Andrew Cagney , Eli Zaretskii , chanskw@ca.ibm.com, gdb@sources.redhat.com References: <3CC81583.2010201@cygnus.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3CC81583.2010201@cygnus.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.23i X-SW-Source: 2002-04/txt/msg00445.txt.bz2 On Thu, Apr 25, 2002 at 10:41:07AM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote: > >On Thu, 25 Apr 2002, Andrew Cagney wrote: > > > > > >>It was added with much hesitation because there was real concern that > >>once a vaguely looking console mechanism was added, people would try to > >>use it instead of investing the time and resources needed to address the > >>problem of implementing a real console interface. > > > > > >What was envisioned as a solution for the problem at hand, namely, that > >any decent front-end to GDB must allow the user to type CLI commands? > > My best answer is that it was envisioned to be fixed in 2.0. Several > alternatives were suggested but no decision was made. Apple has has > since, kind of, made the decision by comming up with a working solution. > > Of the alternatives I remember: > > - properly wrap the CLI up in an > MI command (what apple did). > > Has problems with query() where > the CLI wants to prompt back > to the user. > > (apple's solution) > > - separate out the CLI from GDB > and have it as a separate MI > client While it's more work, it sounds as if this is closer to the solution the IBM people are asking for. It'd be a nice modular boundary... do you think this is feasible? -- Daniel Jacobowitz Carnegie Mellon University MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer