From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20531 invoked by alias); 3 Dec 2002 06:02:13 -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 20514 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2002 06:02:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO is.elta.co.il) (199.203.121.2) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 3 Dec 2002 06:02:11 -0000 Received: from is (is [199.203.121.2]) by is.elta.co.il (8.9.3/8.8.8) with SMTP id IAA14931; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 08:01:56 +0200 (IST) Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2002 22:02:00 -0000 From: Eli Zaretskii X-Sender: eliz@is To: Kevin Buettner cc: Andrew Cagney , gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: GDB Speak: `inferior' rather than `target'? In-Reply-To: <1021202204343.ZM5785@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-SW-Source: 2002-12/txt/msg00040.txt.bz2 On Mon, 2 Dec 2002, Kevin Buettner wrote: > I may be wrong, but it's my impression that the use of the word > `inferior' to describe an instance of the program being debugged is > unique to GDB. No, it's a somewhat common way of referring to a program run by another program. Cf ``inferior shell'' etc. As an example, try grepping the Emacs manual for the word "inferior".