From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29984 invoked by alias); 30 Oct 2008 21:49:14 -0000 Received: (qmail 29766 invoked by uid 22791); 30 Oct 2008 21:49:13 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from yw-out-1718.google.com (HELO yw-out-1718.google.com) (74.125.46.157) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Thu, 30 Oct 2008 21:47:13 +0000 Received: by yw-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id 9so475876ywk.48 for ; Thu, 30 Oct 2008 14:47:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.150.140.16 with SMTP id n16mr18974038ybd.142.1225388753448; Thu, 30 Oct 2008 10:45:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.150.149.13 with HTTP; Thu, 30 Oct 2008 10:45:53 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <5cfa99000810301045q60743d8ata5d687430f363792@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2008 21:49:00 -0000 From: "Edward Peschko" To: "Michael Snyder" Subject: Re: automated trace output with gdb Cc: "gdb@sourceware.org" In-Reply-To: <4908D5BA.8000103@vmware.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <5cfa99000810290001i7d042cf0lf8739bab23b70997@mail.gmail.com> <4908993E.3000601@vmware.com> <5cfa99000810291057q72c63faeyc9a38ac1a3e4ac47@mail.gmail.com> <4908A41F.2060508@vmware.com> <5cfa99000810291203p1aa443e1m2e92cac0507b8811@mail.gmail.com> <4908D5BA.8000103@vmware.com> 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: 2008-10/txt/msg00138.txt.bz2 Message-ID: <20081030214900.POHzdFLFYl6js_Ty7oSZnMO1FAQX9ubiAoRZL4b2DPk@z> Michael, I'd be glad to contribute, but I'm not sure I know the infrastructure of gdb well enough to do it correctly. Any pointers on what would be involved in making a change like this? Ed On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 2:29 PM, Michael Snyder wrote: > Edward Peschko wrote: > >> (gdb) set pagination off > > FYI, you can also use "set height 0" in place of the above. > >> >> I don't know - all in all, IMO this should be a feature of gdb itself, >> just for simplicity's sake, and to avoid the overhead of the scripting >> language. I'm just guessing, but I'd bet that if this was done in a >> tight loop, it would be an order of magnitude faster.. > > Well -- it's an open source project, we welcome contributions. > >