This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [PATCH 0/2] Better handling of slow remote transfers
- From: Pedro Alves <palves at redhat dot com>
- To: Gary Benson <gbenson at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Joel Brobecker <brobecker at adacore dot com>, Doug Evans <dje at google dot com>, Jan Kratochvil <jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com>, gdb-patches <gdb-patches at sourceware dot org>, Sandra Loosemore <sandra at codesourcery dot com>, André Pönitz <apoenitz at t-online dot de>, Paul Koning <Paul_Koning at dell dot com>
- Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2015 12:28:56 +0100
- Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Better handling of slow remote transfers
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <001a11c301b0388ac5051d0c5ab8 at google dot com> <20150811185519 dot GA28644 at host1 dot jankratochvil dot net> <CADPb22TM42jGif4PqOgpvDxb7RhzS=vBgGJijcB7h9-3rCbH7A at mail dot gmail dot com> <20150811195943 dot GC22245 at adacore dot com> <20150812094831 dot GD11096 at blade dot nx> <55CB1B8D dot 6010501 at redhat dot com> <20150812103831 dot GA12792 at blade dot nx>
On 08/12/2015 11:38 AM, Gary Benson wrote:
> It seems like you're saying this series is a big change, but it's
> really not: the core of it is that little snippet of logic, which
> is easy enough to reason about:
>
> IF target filesystem is remote
> AND auto_target_prefix is enabled
> AND no sysroot is set
> AND (we're looking for an executable
> OR we're looking for a solib loaded by a target-prefixed executable):
> Prefix the filename with "target:"
>
IIUC, it still auto fetches the executable and then the solibs from the
target by default (e.g., after "attach"), so still subject to lack
of interruptibility?
> It's certainly way less invasive a change than making transfers
> interruptible would be.
I was only OK with trying to make transfers interruptible in the
branch assuming it was something non-invasive, like a missing QUIT
here and there.
>> I think we need to unblock 7.10 as soon as possible so that 7.11
>> with all the neat sysroot features happens sooner too. :-)
>
> Sure, but why not unblock it this way so that 7.10 users can have
> the neat sysroot features, *if and only if* they use GDB in a way
> that didn't make sense in 7.9?
Thanks,
Pedro Alves