From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 41504 invoked by alias); 27 May 2018 22:13:06 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 41392 invoked by uid 89); 27 May 2018 22:13:05 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=backward, Hmm, loud, 20180518 X-HELO: smtp.polymtl.ca Received: from smtp.polymtl.ca (HELO smtp.polymtl.ca) (132.207.4.11) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Sun, 27 May 2018 22:13:04 +0000 Received: from simark.ca (simark.ca [158.69.221.121]) (authenticated bits=0) by smtp.polymtl.ca (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id w4RMCvaB003069 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Sun, 27 May 2018 18:13:02 -0400 Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id D1CCA1F21C; Sun, 27 May 2018 18:12:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from simark.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D7E81EF61; Sun, 27 May 2018 18:12:57 -0400 (EDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Sun, 27 May 2018 22:13:00 -0000 From: Simon Marchi To: Jan Vrany Cc: Pedro Alves , gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: How to use -list-target-features MI command In-Reply-To: <976c5c036af52fb2f88d3bf7a801edb1ba6405e9.camel@fit.cvut.cz> References: <7d2d750c39c73c13c2d0e04667475d8f@polymtl.ca> <2836ac51befe41b0411f89b6bcdb2ea935148787.camel@fit.cvut.cz> <976c5c036af52fb2f88d3bf7a801edb1ba6405e9.camel@fit.cvut.cz> Message-ID: X-Sender: simon.marchi@polymtl.ca User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.3.6 X-Poly-FromMTA: (simark.ca [158.69.221.121]) at Sun, 27 May 2018 22:12:57 +0000 X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2018-05/txt/msg00026.txt.bz2 On 2018-05-18 17:16, Jan Vrany wrote: > Hmm, just thinking loud: I don't know the details of Pedro's work but > I guess in case of multiple targets, it'd make sense to have two > "target-connected" and "target-disconnected" events instead of one > "target-changed" (as in my attempt). This would work for current > codebase with only one target at time. > > As for -list-target-features - I presume each target would have some > kind of identifier (just like threads or breakpoints do). Then one can > just extend -list-target-features with --target option. > If --target is not specified, it would return features of "currently > selected target". This way it'd be backward compatible. Yep, that makes sense. Simon