From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20798 invoked by alias); 9 Oct 2005 20:26:57 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 20777 invoked by uid 22791); 9 Oct 2005 20:26:54 -0000 Received: from nevyn.them.org (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with ESMTP; Sun, 09 Oct 2005 20:26:54 +0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.52) id 1EOhky-00024u-MS; Sun, 09 Oct 2005 16:26:52 -0400 Date: Sun, 09 Oct 2005 20:26:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: "jingzhao.ou" , gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Separating "shell dir" output from GDB/MI output Message-ID: <20051009202652.GA7916@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: "jingzhao.ou" , gdb@sources.redhat.com References: <20051009123326.GA436@white> <20051009171225.GA4295@nevyn.them.org> <20051009173320.GA972@white> <20051009200248.GA7166@nevyn.them.org> <20051009201923.GB972@white> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20051009201923.GB972@white> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i X-SW-Source: 2005-10/txt/msg00058.txt.bz2 On Sun, Oct 09, 2005 at 04:19:23PM -0400, Bob Rossi wrote: > On Sun, Oct 09, 2005 at 04:02:48PM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > > On Sun, Oct 09, 2005 at 01:33:20PM -0400, Bob Rossi wrote: > > > It solves several problems. The user no longer has to create a pty to > > > give to GDB to separate the inferior output and the console output. > > > (CGDB will have to anyways, since it uses the terminal). > > > > This one we've already solved, albeit with a bit of extra work on the > > part of the frontend (and we were all enthusiastic about the solution, > > too...) > > Sorry, I honestly can't remember what your talking about. What was the > solution for this that the front end had to do? Also, don't forget, on > windows nativly, the front end *can't* open a PTY. Eli came up with this > solution for that problem, > http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/2005-08/msg00047.html All I mean is -inferior-set-tty. > > > Some of the > > > target's apparently write to STDOUT/STDERR, and that get's confused with > > > the MI output. > > > > I don't know what you're referring to here. > > Oops, sorry. This is in the manual, and apparently is not true, > target-stream-output is the output produced by the target program. > All the target output is prefixed by `@'. > We've had complaints by users that target output is not prefixed with > '@'. So, I believe the output from the target can be intermingled with > the MI output. As far as I know this was never implemented except maybe for some remote target. > > > Finally, if we have several > > > interpreters going at the same time, we could have them all output to > > > there own descriptor. > > > > This is an interesting idea, but I don't think it's an obviously right > > choice. The CLI frontend wants its own terminal, really. The MI > > interpreter only needs a pipe. I have use for multiple MI interpreters > > running at the same time, which will all need their own pipes, but > > that's not a big deal with the infrastructure we already have. > > This is interesting. How would you start up GDB in such a scenario? Say > you wanted 2 MI interpreters running. What would you do? One of them is for the frontend. The other is for a Guile or Python script being run, either by the user, or in a virtual "thread" in the background watching for some interesting event. Only one of them would have "focus" at a time, i.e. accept input; the others would receive some set of event notifications. That's my theory anyway. I started implementing this, and ran out of steam. I haven't been back to it in a while. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery, LLC