This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: Using telnet to control a running GDB
- From: Tom Tromey <tromey at redhat dot com>
- To: Jan Kratochvil <jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Marc Khouzam <marc dot khouzam at ericsson dot com>, "'gdb\ at sourceware dot org'" <gdb at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2010 11:40:12 -0700
- Subject: Re: Using telnet to control a running GDB
- References: <F7CE05678329534C957159168FA70DEC572E0C0DCD@EUSAACMS0703.eamcs.ericsson.se> <20101129025627.GA4356@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> <F7CE05678329534C957159168FA70DEC572E79C43E@EUSAACMS0703.eamcs.ericsson.se> <20101129185524.GA13721@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> <F7CE05678329534C957159168FA70DEC572E79C924@EUSAACMS0703.eamcs.ericsson.se> <20101129203906.GA18241@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net>
>>>>> "Jan" == Jan Kratochvil <email@example.com> writes:
Marc> If the console was outside eclipse (like the telnet session,
Marc> I'm mentioning), eclipse may not be able to catch the commands
Marc> from that telnet to be able to parse them, and would then
Marc> fall out-of-sync with GDB.
Jan> MI should rather notify changes done over MI when talking about
Jan> some right way to do it.
I don't think I understand that.
It seems to me that if we want to support a GUI that also has a
gdb-cli-like console, then commands entered at that console should
report both MI and CLI output, so that the GUI can parse the MI
notifications and update other parts of the user interface.
I assume this doesn't work today, but I don't see why it couldn't be
I suppose an alternate idea would be to only have MI output and require
the GUI to format it into the console window itself. This seems
somewhat less nice since it means duplicating the formatting code.