From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20931 invoked by alias); 14 Jul 2004 19:05:30 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 20924 invoked from network); 14 Jul 2004 19:05:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 14 Jul 2004 19:05:30 -0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i6EJ5Te3024914 for ; Wed, 14 Jul 2004 15:05:29 -0400 Received: from localhost.redhat.com (porkchop.devel.redhat.com [172.16.58.2]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i6EJ5T025396; Wed, 14 Jul 2004 15:05:29 -0400 Received: from gnu.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 360922B9D; Wed, 14 Jul 2004 15:05:17 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <40F583ED.7040100@gnu.org> Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2004 19:29:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-GB; rv:1.4.1) Gecko/20040217 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Stephen & Linda Smith Cc: Kevin Buettner , gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: shared library support hookin the remote.c References: <40AD1DA8.3090809@cox.net> <40AE69AB.7000004@cox.net> <20040611141424.2bed79f7@saguaro> <40DA349C.6080607@cox.net> <20040628134303.20e1cff0@saguaro> <40E09084.70108@cox.net> <20040628172120.2844044d@saguaro> <40E0CC21.1020401@cox.net> <20040701105812.44b85b9b@saguaro> <40E5C383.7060506@gnu.org> <40E5D0AB.7010407@cox.net> <40E5E1F6.4090203@gnu.org> <40F32979.4060102@cox.net> <40F57685.7020108@gnu.org> <40F57B9C.6020704@cox.net> In-Reply-To: <40F57B9C.6020704@cox.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2004-07/txt/msg00144.txt.bz2 > > Andrew Cagney wrote: > >> >> So each time the inferior stops, GDB will need to re-poll for shlib changes? > > > That is the way I currently have it set up. > > There is one thing I don't understand about the F packet. How does the inferior know that it is OK to send the packet. From everything that I have read. Comunication is initiated by GDB and answered by the inferior. I didn't know that the stub could initiate a packet. If so, Do I just tack on the F packet information to the end of a currently generated packet? It's new code (added last year). Instead of a normal stop, the inferior reports an F, once that is handled the inferior is resumed again. Corinna documented the interaction pretty well - see the relevant appendix. > This is the reason I was polling. Otherwise I prefer to not poll. > >> >> Can the stub instead generate a packet, very like the recently added F (File I/O) indicating that the link map changed (and what)? > > > I think I have answered this by answering the preceding question. > >> >> The other is to have a custom xxx-shlib hooked up to inferior stopped that queries for the stuff you describe. It could probably be tunneled as a TARGET_OBJECT_KOD packet. >> > If I implement the F packet would that get rid if the need for a xxx-shlib? I think so. Andrew