labath added a comment. In D98482#2641041 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D98482#2641041>, @mgorny wrote:
> In D98482#2640981 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D98482#2640981>, @labath wrote: > >> This should be fine, assuming the following statement is true: "all thread >> id's that we're passing from server to client are in the form of some >> lldb-specific extension to the gdb-remote protocol". If that is not the >> case, then we should also update the client to work with the new format. > > That statement is somewhat confusing. Do I understand correctly that I should > update the client to handle process IDs in all the places where GDB protocol > permits server to send PIDs? I suppose that makes sense. Yeah, that's what I meant. The having "multiprocess" in qSupported means that we support the relevant syntax, and I don't want the client to lie about that. If it turns out to be particularly problematic, we can discuss that. Possibly by including the extension only in the server response? CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D98482/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D98482 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
