From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26802 invoked by alias); 5 Sep 2007 05:39:01 -0000 Received: (qmail 26606 invoked by uid 22791); 5 Sep 2007 05:39:00 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from zigzag.lvk.cs.msu.su (HELO zigzag.lvk.cs.msu.su) (158.250.17.23) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Wed, 05 Sep 2007 05:38:53 +0000 Received: from Debian-exim by zigzag.lvk.cs.msu.su with spam-scanned (Exim 4.50) id 1ISnbH-0002d5-1v for gdb@sources.redhat.com; Wed, 05 Sep 2007 09:38:51 +0400 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ip6-localhost) by zigzag.lvk.cs.msu.su with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA:32) (Exim 4.50) id 1ISnbC-0002ct-4A; Wed, 05 Sep 2007 09:38:46 +0400 From: Vladimir Prus To: Nick Roberts Subject: Re: MI: "^running" issues Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2007 05:39:00 -0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.6 Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com References: <200709041653.22357.ghost@cs.msu.su> <18142.15716.179444.106490@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> In-Reply-To: <18142.15716.179444.106490@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200709050938.45290.ghost@cs.msu.su> Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2007-09/txt/msg00030.txt.bz2 On Wednesday 05 September 2007 09:23:48 Nick Roberts wrote: > > I've just run into a somewhat nasty behaviour of gdb. > > Suppose if you've set 5 hardware watchpoints (on x86) > > and to -exec-step. The output from gdb will be: > > > > (gdb) -exec-next > > ^running > > (gdb) > > 34^error,msg="...." > > I can't reproduce this. It looks like partial recipe. I suppose I can try to make a full recipe -- but only if you're intending to fix that ;-) > >... > > - Killing the idea of async commands. It does not seem to be very useful > > at this point, so we might be better off ripping it and implementing afresh > > later, when it's understood what they should be. > > I'm working in the opposite direction: trying to get GDB to work asynchronously. > I don't see the point of ripping out what is already there. Then, can you please provide a specification of what "asynchronously" means, and why it's good for users and frontends? Thanks, Volodya