This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the GDB project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: patch to add QNX NTO i386 support


> >> >Bingo.  And it's also the way our ide talks to gdb.  If the exec
filename
> >> >is
> >> >not set, gdb treats the first argument to run as the path to the file
and
> >> >subsequent arguments as regular args.
> >
> >>
> >> I don't think that change would be accepted into GDB.  It makes `run'
> >> just too modal :-/
> >
> >
> > That was my first reaction too.  But he's not describing a local change
> > to GDB - we already do this!  Argh!
>
> Yes, arrrg!  Bug!

Why arrrgh?  I know it makes run a little context sensitive but I don't
think anyone trips on it.  The normal usage pattern of gdb precludes people
having problems with it and it's very useful for us.  I still haven't heard
any suggestions of how we might accomplish what we do.

cheers,

Kris


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]