From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25365 invoked by alias); 10 Oct 2005 08:41:01 -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 25353 invoked by uid 22791); 10 Oct 2005 08:40:58 -0000 Received: from pluton.ispras.ru (HELO pluton.ispras.ru) (83.149.199.253) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with SMTP; Mon, 10 Oct 2005 08:40:58 +0000 Received: (qmail 71725 invoked from network); 10 Oct 2005 08:33:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO truba.ispras.ru) (83.149.198.41) by pluton.ispras.ru with SMTP; 10 Oct 2005 08:33:40 -0000 Received: from truba.ispras.ru (root@localhost) by truba.ispras.ru (8.13.1/8.13.1) with SMTP id j9A8er8S016342 for ; Mon, 10 Oct 2005 12:40:53 +0400 Received: from ispserv.ispras.ru (ispserv [83.149.198.72]) by truba.ispras.ru (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id j9A8erwa016333; Mon, 10 Oct 2005 12:40:53 +0400 Received: from kite.ispras.ru (kite.ispras.ru [83.149.198.52]) by ispserv.ispras.ru (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id j9A8eoIt023117; Mon, 10 Oct 2005 12:40:52 +0400 Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 08:41:00 -0000 From: Konstantin Karganov Reply-To: Konstantin Karganov Message-ID: <378568600.20051010124328@ispras.ru> To: Daniel Jacobowitz CC: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re[2]: Separating "shell dir" output from GDB/MI output In-reply-To: <20051009200400.GB7166@nevyn.them.org> References: <20051009123326.GA436@white> <20051009171225.GA4295@nevyn.them.org> <20051009200400.GB7166@nevyn.them.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SpamTest-Version: SMTP-Filter Version 2.0.0 [0125], KAS/Release X-Spamtest-Info: Pass through X-Anti-Virus: Kaspersky Anti-Virus for MailServers 5.5.2/RELEASE, bases: 10102005 #143951, status: clean X-SW-Source: 2005-10/txt/msg00061.txt.bz2 Hello Daniel, DJ> Ideally, IMO, we should have the CLI as a true frontend rather than DJ> interwoven with gdb. I don't know if that's practical. It would be practical at least from the point of view that GDB developers and GDB-users will stand on the same side of "MI-barricade". It will give a better chance to fix all this misundesrtandings like with phantom "@target-output" feature and refine MI specification and implementation details. -- Best regards, Konstantin mailto:kostik@ispras.ru