Re: [RFC]: Remote Protocol "attach" command.

[jtc at redback dot com (J.T. Conklin)]

>>>>> "Andrew" == Andrew Cagney <ac131313@cygnus.com> writes:
>> There already is a detach command.  I think the protocol spec could be
>> worded to indicate that the program under debug is released to
>> continue executing.  It does not appear that gdbserver understands the
>> command.  Question: after the inferior is detached, should you be able
>> to re-attach (or attach to a different process) without
>> re-establishing communication to the debug agent (with `target remote
>> <foo>')?

Andrew> That detatch command is something else again.  I think it is
Andrew> wrong / broken.  The rationale is similar to why the set-baud
Andrew> packet was broken.

Andrew> GDB sends the ``detatch'' packet just before the connection is
Andrew> dropped.  This allows something haning of a semi-permenant
Andrew> serial connection (ie serial port) to be notified of GDB's
Andrew> pending departure.  What should happen is that the transport
Andrew> layer should shut its self down.  The detatch packet scrambles
Andrew> protocol layers :-(

I didn't realize that the existing detach packet was used like that.
I 100% agree that no packet should effect the transport layer.

However, if there is a way to attach to the target (where attach is
distinct from establishing a connection to it), I believe that there
should also be some way to detach from it and have it continue as if
nothing happened.

        --jtc

-- 
J.T. Conklin
RedBack Networks