This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [RFA] Remote symbol look-up (resubmission)
- To: Michael Snyder <msnyder at cygnus dot com>
- Subject: Re: [RFA] Remote symbol look-up (resubmission)
- From: Andrew Cagney <ac131313 at cygnus dot com>
- Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 22:57:12 -0400
- Cc: gdb-patches at sources dot redhat dot com
- References: <3AFC20A5.700ACFAF@cygnus.com>
Michael,
sorry about this, but what does the current interaction look like?
Looking at the code I think it is doing:
-> qSumbol:<symbol-file>
<- "" - unknown
"OK" - done
"qSymbol:<symbol>"
then:
-> QSymbol:<value>:<symbol>
or QSymbol::<symbol>
<- "" unknown
"OK" - done
"qSymbol:<symbol>"
while the documentation suggests:
-> qSymbSymbol:<symfile>
et.al.
My understanding of the most recent discussion was that the interaction
was going to be:
-> qSymbol
<- "" - unknown
"OK" - done
"qSymbol:<symbol>"
and then
-> qSymbol:<value>:<symbol>
<- same return values
because the symbol file wasn't, in its self, useful to the target. The
qSymbol without arguments indicated new symbols were available.
However, if you think the target should be notified of each new symbol
file then I'd rather see protocol go back to ``[qQ]SymbolFile:<file>''
followed by ``[qQ]Symbol:<val>:<sym>'' rather than the very subtlely
different ``QSymbol'' vs ``qSymbol''.
sorry about this,
Andrew