Re: Incompatible implementat ion of 'x' packet in GDB vs LLDB

"Robert O'Callahan" <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.gdb.devel
Message-ID <CAOp6jLZT0Ta-C-hRC71TDjhZWg6Pyy05hEwBX0PtSzqHbGV7XQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, 23 Jan 2025 at 08:57, Robert O'Callahan <[email protected]>
wrote:

> GDB (client) 16.1 started sending the gdbserver 'x' packet. It follows the
> documentation [1] and expects a leading 'b' in the response [2].
> Unfortunately LLDB has supported this packet for quite a long time [3] and
> does not expect a leading 'b' in the response. We added support for this
> packet to rr last year and followed LLDB's format because it was the only
> user of the packet at that time. So GDB 16.1 doesn't work with rr. [4]
>
> I realize that compatibility between GDB and LLDB flavoured gdbserver
> protocols is not a priority for either team, but until now it has actually
> worked in practice --- rr hasn't needed a client mode switch. We can add
> one, but it will be unfortunate if GDB 16.1 and later is incompatible for
> anyone who's installed the latest rr since May 2024.
>
> Could you make a GDB 16.1 point release that removes the 'b'? AFAIK it
> serves no purpose.
>

It has been pointed out that if you want to return different error codes
then you need the 'b'. Is that the rationale?

Rob
-- 
Su ot deraeppa sah dna Rehtaf eht htiw saw hcihw, efil lanrete eht uoy ot
mialcorp ew dna, ti ot yfitset dna ti nees evah ew; deraeppa efil eht. Efil
fo Drow eht gninrecnoc mialcorp ew siht - dehcuot evah sdnah ruo dna ta
dekool evah ew hcihw, seye ruo htiw nees evah ew hcihw, draeh evah ew
hcihw, gninnigeb eht morf saw hcihw taht.
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.