This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [PATCH] specify arguments to debugee from commandline (second try)
Tom Tromey wrote:
> >>>>> "Pierre" == Pierre Muller <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> >> > Maybe you mean that redirections won't work as expected.
> >> Redirection is one thing I thought about. But anything else that has
> >> side effects, such as setting variables or computing expressions,
> >> could potentially work differently as well.
> Pierre> File expansion would also occur, no ?
> Pierre> By the way, does this occur to args given by set args ?
> Pierre> Probably not, but I am not sure here.
> Yes, file expansion happens when you use `run' in gdb as well.
> That's because gdb uses the shell to launch the inferior.
> At least, with native Unix debugging. I don't know how arguments are
> handled by embedded targets.
> I personally want --run for my native debugging. So I'm not too
> concerned about how embedded targets handle strange cases here.
I'd suggest ignoring embedded targets for the moment. Most of them
don't even allow command line arguments. If:
gdb --XXX ...
is made to work for the native case then someone else can fix the
Anyway, I think people have generally agreed that being to type:
$ foo bar boof woftam
$ gdb --??? !$
is preferable to:
$ gdb --args=`something goes here`
It is a case of user convenience winning over correctness.
The next question is to do with the exact arg name. I've several
o xterm uses -e program arguments
o I think of --run ... as more for
the complete load'n'go case.
GDB sets the arguments and fires
up the program. Only when the
program crashes does GDB start.
Any way, if the --??? option is added then, we're one step short of the
--run that everyone really wants.