From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7754 invoked by alias); 27 Jun 2008 13:53:52 -0000 Received: (qmail 7743 invoked by uid 22791); 27 Jun 2008 13:53:51 -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; Fri, 27 Jun 2008 13:53:31 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76A2E98366; Fri, 27 Jun 2008 13:53:29 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (22.svnf5.xdsl.nauticom.net [209.195.183.55]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5528398337; Fri, 27 Jun 2008 13:53:29 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1KCEOG-0007FE-EN; Fri, 27 Jun 2008 09:53:28 -0400 Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2008 13:53:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Vladimir Prus Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [MI] argv/argc/args Message-ID: <20080627135328.GA26625@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Vladimir Prus , gdb@sources.redhat.com References: <200806251306.27720.vladimir@codesourcery.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200806251306.27720.vladimir@codesourcery.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2008-05-11) 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: 2008-06/txt/msg00294.txt.bz2 On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 01:06:27PM +0400, Vladimir Prus wrote: > So, we have 3 commands for which requiring the input to be quoted per MI rules > will cause issues; and fixing those issues will require changing other parts of > GDB to avoid parsing filenames, which is risky at this point. It appears, that > instead of reverting my original patch, we can just path those 3 commands > via CLI directly. Does the plan sound reasonable? Can we use the same approach for -exec-run/-exec-return now that some of your other async-related patches are in? I know it's less likely, but we can't rule out some frontend using them. For -target-select, -target-download, and -exec-until your approach sounds great to me. We do want these things to be quoted normally someday but I think it has to wait for mi3. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery