Re: MI output command error

Daniel Jacobowitz
2005-03-10T16:13:27Z

On Thu, Mar 10, 2005 at 11:08:52AM -0500, 'Bob Rossi' wrote:
> > > That's why I think the output
> > >
> > > (gdb)
> > > 444-exec-continue
> > > 444*running
> > > 444*stopped...
> > > (gdb)
> > >
> > > is better.
> >
> > Well, you're wrong. "running" is the output from the exec-continue
> > command and it is synchronous: the exec-continue command executes, starts up
> > the inferior, prints out "running", and is then complete. At that point the
> > inferior is running, but regardless of that, gdb is ready to take more
> > commands and so should prompt you.
>
> It is? It is still busy executing the inferior. I was under the
> impression GDB was somehow "busy" while executing the inferior. Is this
> not true?

Not necessarily; some targets are asynhronous.

> > The "stopped" output is an asynchronous
> > notification of an event that occurred while the inferior was running, but
> > that in no sense makes it output from the "exec-continue" command.
>
> Well, GDB says that it is output from the -exec-continue command. It's
> asyncronous output. That's why the TOKEN 444 is before the *stopped.

If it is asynchronous, that presumably means GDB is willing to accept
input.... by definition even.

--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC