From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15850 invoked by alias); 15 May 2006 20:33:45 -0000 Received: (qmail 15840 invoked by uid 22791); 15 May 2006 20:33:45 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from eastrmmtao02.cox.net (HELO eastrmmtao02.cox.net) (68.230.240.37) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Mon, 15 May 2006 20:33:43 +0000 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([68.9.66.48]) by eastrmmtao02.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.06.01 201-2131-130-101-20060113) with ESMTP id <20060515203340.IMOQ15470.eastrmmtao02.cox.net@localhost.localdomain>; Mon, 15 May 2006 16:33:40 -0400 Received: from bob by localhost.localdomain with local (Exim 4.52) id 1Ffjlq-000689-Nb; Mon, 15 May 2006 16:34:26 -0400 Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 21:08:00 -0000 From: Bob Rossi To: PAUL GILLIAM , gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: invoking GDB from FE and signals Message-ID: <20060515203426.GD21608@brasko.net> References: <20060513151057.GA4112@nevyn.them.org> <20060513152021.GE10678@brasko.net> <20060513154816.GA5022@nevyn.them.org> <1147712871.3672.153.camel@dufur.beaverton.ibm.com> <20060515181821.GA18932@brasko.net> <20060515191714.GA5918@nevyn.them.org> <20060515194313.GA21608@brasko.net> <20060515200547.GA8151@nevyn.them.org> <20060515201006.GB21608@brasko.net> <20060515202042.GA8673@nevyn.them.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060515202042.GA8673@nevyn.them.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-05/txt/msg00224.txt.bz2 On Mon, May 15, 2006 at 04:20:42PM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > On Mon, May 15, 2006 at 04:10:06PM -0400, Bob Rossi wrote: > > OK, here's the problem. There are 2 case's, using a PTY or not. > > > > I am currently not using a PTY. So, I send the signal via kill. Is this > > correct or incorrect? > > I have no idea how to get this right for the pipe case. Maybe someone > else does. Yeah, it appears both emacs and CGDB get this wrong for the pipe case, as they both loose GDB when ^c is typed. I wonder if this is a bug or simply impossible ... > > If I use a PTY, which I'm going to have to reimplement. I'll except > > signals like SIGINT, cause I'll forward them with 'write' to the PTY > > between GDB and CGDB. > > I don't think "write" will do it; you need something more complicated. > Maybe I'm wrong and writing the interrupt character will do it. I desire that CGDB works exactly the same as if the user was at the terminal with GDB. So, ^c probably is what I want, since it's what the user would have to do anyways. Does this sound correct to you? Bob Rossi