Re: [rfc / remote protocol] Remote shared library events

Eli Zaretskii
2007-05-10T03:18:34Z

> Date: Wed, 9 May 2007 16:16:27 -0400
> From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>
> Cc: gdb@sourceware.org
>
> Eli, do the manual changes look OK?

Yes, but see a few comments below.

> +* The GDB remote protocol "T" stop reply packet now supports "dll",
> +"load", and "unload" pairs. Combined with the qfDllInfo and qsDllInfo

qfDllInfo and qsDllInfo are new, so please say that (as you do below
for T).

> +@item
> +If @var{n} is @samp{load}, then the packet indicates a DLL load event,
> +and @var{r} describes the newly loaded library. The library format is
> +the same used in @samp{qfDllInfo} replies (@pxref{qfDllInfo}), e.g.@:
> +@samp{load:Name=@var{hexname},TextSeg=@var{textaddr}}. The entry may
> +end in @samp{,nop} if this library was already mapped, e.g.@: by an
> +earlier call to @code{LoadLibrary}. @var{aa} should be @samp{05}, the
> +trap signal.

I think we need to explain what is ``hexname'' here, unless it is
already used and explained in the preceding portion of this section.

Also, should we have some index entries here?

> +until the target responds with @samp{l} (lower-case el, for
^^
I believe the letter's name is ``ell''.

> +Reply:
> +@table @samp
> +@item m Name=@var{hexname},TextSeg=@var{textaddr}@r{[},DataSeg=@var{dataaddr}@r{]}

Does this long line look good in print?

> +@item m @var{library}; @var{library}@dots{} @r{[}; l@r{[}

Did you really mean two left [ brackets here?