RFA: "disconnect" command
Daniel Jacobowitz
drow@mvista.com
Mon Jun 16 14:38:00 GMT 2003
On Mon, Jun 16, 2003 at 10:01:16AM -0400, Paul Koning wrote:
> >>>>> "Daniel" == Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com> writes:
>
> Daniel> On Mon, Jun 16, 2003 at 09:29:42AM -0400, Paul Koning wrote:
> >> >>>>> "Daniel" == Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com> writes:
> >> ...
> Daniel> Refresher on this one: the patch adds a "disconnect" commad,
> Daniel> and implements it for remote targets. "disconnect" leaves
> Daniel> the target stopped, while "detach" usually resumes it.
> Daniel> Useful with kgdb, gdbserver, et cetera.
> >> Useful indeed. But there is nothing in the names "detach" and
> >> "disconnect" that suggests how they differ. Would it be possible
> >> to have command names that are suggestive of their action?
>
> Daniel> The last time I proposed this, we went back and forth for a
> Daniel> week on names and this was the best we could come up with.
> Daniel> Have you got a better suggestion?
>
> Nothing really promising. But how about doing this with an (optional)
> argument on the "detach" command, e.g., "detach stop" and "detach go"
> with the latter being the default?
That's similar to what I suggested originally, though it makes a little
more sense. If other people like it I'll switch, but I don't really
think it's better than disconnect.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer
More information about the Gdb-patches
mailing list