This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: MI testsuite to use PTY for inferior
- From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu dot org>
- To: gdb-patches at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Mon, 01 Aug 2005 21:45:18 +0300
- Subject: Re: MI testsuite to use PTY for inferior
- References: <17131.5769.342629.658975@farnswood.snap.net.nz> <20050730173855.GA21401@white> <17131.64575.780190.163527@farnswood.snap.net.nz> <20050730230309.GA22547@white> <20050731012111.GB13808@nevyn.them.org> <20050731131653.GC22547@white> <20050731153051.GA28158@nevyn.them.org> <20050731212021.GA24144@white> <uack248er.fsf@gnu.org> <20050801113002.GB24853@white>
- Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu dot org>
> Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2005 07:30:02 -0400
> From: Bob Rossi <bob@brasko.net>
> Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
>
> I am claiming that a reliable FE can not be written if the inferior writes
> data to the same output stream as GDB/MI's output stream. So, on native
> windows, if the inferior I/O and GDB/MI I/O can not be separated, it
> wouldn't be worth while to write an FE on that platform.
IMHO, you are again jumping to conclusions. The problem was that
Windows doesn't support PTYs, not that it's impossible to separate the
two output streams there.
> Nick, does Emacs port natively to windows?
Of course, it does. I'm writing this mail in such a port ;-)
> Are there any other routes to go down here?
(Shrug) What about redirecting one of the streams to another file
handle? I think any modern platform will support this. We could, for
example, make this an option (it could be on by default if PTYs aren't
supported).
In fact, doesn't GDB already use a different standard output stream?
I thought it did.