Re: PR13901

Pedro Alves
2012-04-02T16:31:10Z

On 04/02/2012 05:22 PM, Andreas Schwab wrote:

> Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com> writes:
>
>> We can't make GDB fully compatible in all cases with what it can do today
>> if we skip the shell completely. E.g., with "set args $(foo)", "$(foo)" is
>> expanded by the shell, and what that means is up to the user's shell.
>
> You can handle that by calling the shell only for expanding the
> arguments.

True, but with that and redirection syntax being also shell
specific, I'm not sure what would be the point compared to what
we've always done.

--
Pedro Alves