This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: mi tty commands
- From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu dot org>
- To: gdb-patches at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Wed, 01 Jun 2005 23:11:56 +0300
- Subject: Re: mi tty commands
- References: <20050225212201.GA3592@nevyn.them.org> <20050228162003.GA27783@white> <20050302025219.GA29948@white> <20050311022644.GA15563@white> <20050522210040.GB9231@white> <20050528230855.GE22435@nevyn.them.org> <uzmue8qsk.fsf@gnu.org> <20050529205435.GA11243@white> <20050601001440.GB15414@white> <uk6leafql.fsf@gnu.org> <20050601130653.GA17103@white>
- Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu dot org>
> Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2005 09:06:53 -0400
> From: Bob Rossi <bob@brasko.net>
> Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
>
> > Which reminds me: now that you introduced "set tty", doesn't that mean
> > we should remove the "tty" command as redundant?
>
> I don't think so. Simply because the tty command has been around for
> ages and FE's depend on it being there. Removing the tty command would
> successfully break every front end.
Not if we leave "tty" as an alias for "set tty". Any objections to do
that as part of your patch?