RE: [cdt-dev] Support for "target-detach" and "target-disconnect"

[Marc Khouzam <marc.khouzam@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mikhail Khodjaiants
> Sent: April-14-10 11:06 PM
> To: cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [cdt-dev] Support for "target-detach" and 
> "target-disconnect"
> 
> 
> 
> On 14/04/2010 10:51 PM, Marc Khouzam wrote:
> > But for CDI, what you sugggest (so I understand), is that 
> the Eclipse 'disconnect' button,
> > will always call GDB's 'disconnect' command (instead of 
> calling 'detach' which it does right now).
> > And to call GDB's 'detach' there will be a new view-menu 
> action called 'detach'.
> >
> > If so, someone is going to write a new DSF-GDB parity bug 
> which will say we don't behave
> > like CDI.  And I'm going to blow a fuse :-)
> >    
> That's the reason why I didn't want to mention the "p" word 
> :-) . I am 
> thinking of volunteering to change the DSF part as well, but first we 
> need to agree what we want.
> > But seriously, I can see that there is a use-case for 
> 'disconnect' and that the fact that the eclipse
> > button is called 'disconnect' causes a problem.  There is 
> no way to 'retarget' the name  to 'detach'?
> > At this time, I find that having 'disconnect' on the 
> toolbar is less useful than having 'detach', especially
> > for multi-process.
> >
> >    
> Absolutely agree. Having "Disconnect" on the toolbar is 
> simply a waste 
> of space from our point of view. And I have never proposed to put 
> "detach" on the toolbar.

I might be confused about the final proposal, so let's recap.
You suggest
1- make the disconnect button actually call 'disconnect' in GDB
    for any debug context selected
2- add a view menu called 'detach' which calls GDB's 'detach'

If that is the case, for multi-process, we'll have the DSF-GDB
'connect' button on the toolbar which will be used to attach to
a new process, but the user will need to go to the view menu
to 'detach', and if they press the 'disconnect', (which they will :-))
they would disconnect the entire debug session.

I would think we need a better solution.

But maybe I mis-understood?

> > Marc
> >    
> Cheers,
> Mikhail
> > ________________________________________
> > From: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx 
> [cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mikhail 
> Khodjaiants [mikhailkhod@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> > Sent: April 14, 2010 10:14 PM
> > To: cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: Re: [cdt-dev] Support for "target-detach" and  
> "target-disconnect"
> >
> > Thanks to Pedro the difference is clear now.
> >    
> >> So what is the final proposal?
> >>
> >>      
> > One option is to change the CDI implementation only by adding the
> > "Detach" action to debug.mi.core and debug.mi.ui plugins. 
> You can leave
> > the DSF/GDB implementation as it is, but at some point you 
> will have to
> > make a decision.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Mikhail
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > cdt-dev mailing list
> > cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > 
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev______________
> _________________________________
> > cdt-dev mailing list
> > cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev
> >    
> _______________________________________________
> cdt-dev mailing list
> cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev
>