From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22872 invoked by alias); 6 May 2008 02:36:46 -0000 Received: (qmail 22859 invoked by uid 22791); 6 May 2008 02:36:45 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from NaN.false.org (HELO nan.false.org) (208.75.86.248) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Tue, 06 May 2008 02:36:25 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E695980F7; Tue, 6 May 2008 02:36:23 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (22.svnf5.xdsl.nauticom.net [209.195.183.55]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C47D98060; Tue, 6 May 2008 02:36:23 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1JtD2U-0003F0-CP; Mon, 05 May 2008 22:36:22 -0400 Date: Tue, 06 May 2008 02:36:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Marc Khouzam Cc: "gdb@sourceware.org" Subject: Re: Multi-Process Mode for gdbserver Message-ID: <20080506023622.GA12437@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Marc Khouzam , "gdb@sourceware.org" References: <803815B8DB5071438A047CB187B98880F95109F3DD@BL2PRD0001MB022.prod.exchangelabs.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <803815B8DB5071438A047CB187B98880F95109F3DD@BL2PRD0001MB022.prod.exchangelabs.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-12-11) X-IsSubscribed: yes 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: 2008-05/txt/msg00047.txt.bz2 On Mon, May 05, 2008 at 06:38:14PM -0700, Marc Khouzam wrote: > From what I gather though, there is no monitor command to list the > processes that are available where gdbserver is running. Is there a > good reason for that, or is it just that no one has had the time? No one had the interest yet. If gdbserver is running over ssh, and you're using it by hand, it's not a big hardship to keep another window open. > If it is a missing patch, then I am willing to look into implementing this. However, I wonder how to deal > with the fact that such a function is OS dependent. Personally, I want it for Linux. Is it ok > to try to enhance gdbserver to have "monitor list processes" but only for Linux? And if so, it is ok to > simply have gdbserver call ps? Depends what you want to do with the data. If all you want is a textual list, then even "monitor shell ps" would be OK. It relies on having ps on the target and the output will vary based on what version of ps you have. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery