From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12211 invoked by alias); 15 May 2012 12:13:25 -0000 Received: (qmail 12198 invoked by uid 22791); 15 May 2012 12:13:23 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_NO X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from smtpgate01.nexlink.ch (HELO smtpgate02.nexlink.ch) (80.86.198.161) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 15 May 2012 12:13:09 +0000 Received: from [192.168.7.110] ([188.60.20.9]) by imp01.agrinet.ch with id ACD71j00M0BlBSs03CD8UU; Tue, 15 May 2012 14:13:08 +0200 X-IMP-FROM: _________ X-IMP-AUTH_USERNAME: X-Original-IP: 188.60.20.9 Message-ID: <4FB24851.3070105@noobody.org> Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 12:13:00 -0000 From: Noobody User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120428 Thunderbird/12.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: eran.ifrah@gmail.com CC: gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [mingw gdb/mi] Separating debuggee output from MI References: <4FB1F5B5.6090701@noobody.org> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2012-05/txt/msg00068.txt.bz2 >By running this command, gdb will create a new console for the debugee output. >i.e. all the redirected IO that you capture in your frontend will always be gdb's output. Hi, Thanks for the tip! I am aware of this option, but I would prefer to be able to handle input/output from the debugger itself. The problem is that the Windows console is not exactly very convenient when it comes to handling standard operations such as copying, pasting, window resizing or similar. Also, keeping all the info and controls in one window instead of two when debugging would be preferrable in my opinion. As such, I've been looking for methods to get hold of the debuggees output directly (which I probably should have mentioned in the first mail). The method I have now seems to work fine, but I just know too little of gdb's internals to be able to tell whether this could cause problems in the future.