From: Gary Benson <gbenson@redhat.com>
To: Doug Evans <dje@google.com>
Cc: Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>,
gdb-patches <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>,
Philippe Waroquiers <philippe.waroquiers@skynet.be>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Make only user-specified executable filenames sticky
Date: Wed, 13 May 2015 07:55:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150513075456.GA3730@blade.nx> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CADPb22R8yoX8M7Ws0D4QFDOqK1cgdveNsrdrJwp_=SuCH64qcw@mail.gmail.com>
Doug Evans wrote:
> On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 3:36 AM, Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com> wrote:
> > On 05/11/2015 09:23 PM, Doug Evans wrote:
> > > On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 3:26 AM, Gary Benson <gbenson@redhat.com> wrote:
> > > > This commit updates GDB to keep track of which executable
> > > > filenames were supplied by the user. When GDB might attempt
> > > > to determine an executable filename and one is already set,
> > > > filenames determined by GDB may be overridden but
> > > > user-supplied filenames will not.
> > >
> > > I can imagine sometimes wanting either behaviour, depending on
> > > the situation.
> >
> > Yeah, AFAICS, both examples you gave work the same before
> > and after Gary's patch.
> >
> > > E.g., if I supply a file name do some stuff, and then change
> > > my mind or wish to investigate a difference process I may
> > > wish gdb to automagically pick up the file name of the new
> > > process.
> >
> > In that case, one can use "file; attach PID".
> >
> > That is, you can just unload the previous program, so that GDB
> > picks up the new one automatically on next attach.
>
> I realize one *could* do that.
> Thing is, someone's muscle memory may make them expect
> "attach PID" to Just Work.
> After all, "bash$ gdb" + "(gdb) attach PID" Just Works.
>
> Plus that's two steps.
> Why do I *have* to first type "file" with no arguments?
> (Joe User may be thinking)
> The difference in the two scenarios is explainable, but there's
> still an incongruity here.
>
> We go to lengths to reduce typing in the CLI session.
> IWBN if one could type, say,
> "attach -f PID" (f for "force gdb to use the binary of the attached
> process", or whatever).
I asked already, but nobody answered, so...
If you say "attach PID", and GDB can see that PID's executable is
/foo/bar, and the current exec-file is not /foo/bar/, under what
circumstances should GDB *not* automatically reload the new exec-
file? i.e. why could this "attach -f" behavior not be the default?
Cheers,
Gary
--
http://gbenson.net/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-05-13 7:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 47+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-05-02 9:48 qXfer:exec-file:read and non multiprocess target Philippe Waroquiers
2015-05-05 11:02 ` Gary Benson
2015-05-05 20:45 ` Philippe Waroquiers
2015-05-06 10:31 ` Gary Benson
2015-05-06 17:10 ` [PATCH] Locate executables on remote stubs without multiprocess extensions Gary Benson
2015-05-06 17:15 ` Eli Zaretskii
2015-05-06 17:16 ` Gary Benson
2015-05-11 14:37 ` Pedro Alves
2015-05-12 11:03 ` Gary Benson
2015-05-05 15:14 ` qXfer:exec-file:read and non multiprocess target Gary Benson
2015-05-06 10:26 ` [PATCH] Make only user-specified executable filenames sticky Gary Benson
2015-05-06 12:19 ` Pedro Alves
2015-05-06 14:21 ` Pedro Alves
2015-05-06 15:20 ` Gary Benson
2015-05-11 13:57 ` Pedro Alves
2015-05-06 14:46 ` Philippe Waroquiers
2015-05-06 15:41 ` Gary Benson
2015-05-11 13:58 ` Pedro Alves
2015-05-11 20:25 ` Doug Evans
2015-05-11 17:14 ` Don Breazeal
2015-06-05 9:37 ` Gary Benson
2015-06-05 14:54 ` Don Breazeal
2015-07-03 11:14 ` Gary Benson
2015-07-06 12:53 ` Joel Brobecker
2015-07-17 21:48 ` Joel Brobecker
2015-05-11 20:23 ` Doug Evans
2015-05-12 10:36 ` Pedro Alves
2015-05-12 11:13 ` Gary Benson
2015-05-12 11:16 ` Pedro Alves
2015-05-12 13:48 ` Gary Benson
2015-05-12 14:08 ` Pedro Alves
2015-05-12 15:49 ` Doug Evans
2015-05-13 7:55 ` Gary Benson [this message]
2015-05-13 9:12 ` Pedro Alves
2015-06-03 17:23 ` Joel Brobecker
2015-06-05 11:22 ` [PATCH v2] Make only user-specified executable and symbol " Gary Benson
2015-06-07 11:40 ` Philippe Waroquiers
2015-06-08 9:01 ` [PATCH v3] " Gary Benson
2015-06-08 19:42 ` Philippe Waroquiers
2015-07-03 11:01 ` Gary Benson
2015-07-03 15:44 ` Pedro Alves
2015-07-06 13:01 ` Pedro Alves
2015-06-07 12:03 ` [PATCH v2] " Philippe Waroquiers
2015-06-07 12:13 ` Philippe Waroquiers
2015-05-13 8:06 ` [PATCH] Make only user-specified executable " Pedro Alves
2015-05-12 16:03 ` Doug Evans
2015-05-13 8:39 ` Pedro Alves
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20150513075456.GA3730@blade.nx \
--to=gbenson@redhat.com \
--cc=dje@google.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
--cc=palves@redhat.com \
--cc=philippe.waroquiers@skynet.be \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).