[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D79614: Fix error reporting for qLaunchSuccess, check for fix/enable it via qSupported

clayborg added a comment. In D79614#2030692 , @jasonmolenda wrote: > Thanks for the feedback. > > In D79614#2029157 , @labath wrote: > > > I think that "piggy-backing" on the `qSupported` packet for communicating

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D79614: Fix error reporting for qLaunchSuccess, check for fix/enable it via qSupported

This revision was not accepted when it landed; it landed in state "Needs Review". This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. Closed by commit rG2b8b783b1ab4: Quote error string from qLaunchSuccess (authored by jasonmolenda). Changed prior to commit:

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D79614: Fix error reporting for qLaunchSuccess, check for fix/enable it via qSupported

jasonmolenda added a comment. Thanks for the feedback. In D79614#2029157 , @labath wrote: > I think that "piggy-backing" on the `qSupported` packet for communicating > protocol fixes is a good idea. However, I agree with Greg, that it does not > seem

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D79614: Fix error reporting for qLaunchSuccess, check for fix/enable it via qSupported

labath added a comment. I think that "piggy-backing" on the `qSupported` packet for communicating protocol fixes is a good idea. However, I agree with Greg, that it does not seem like it's needed for this case. Fixing the problem purely on the debugserver side seems preferable, as it avoids

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D79614: Fix error reporting for qLaunchSuccess, check for fix/enable it via qSupported

jasonmolenda added a comment. In D79614#2028295 , @clayborg wrote: > In D79614#2027869 , @jasonmolenda > wrote: > > > In D79614#2027861 , @clayborg > > wrote: > > > > >

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D79614: Fix error reporting for qLaunchSuccess, check for fix/enable it via qSupported

clayborg added a comment. In D79614#2027869 , @jasonmolenda wrote: > In D79614#2027861 , @clayborg wrote: > > > Why not just fix qLaunchSuccess by passing the string through a > > "escape_string(...)" function?

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D79614: Fix error reporting for qLaunchSuccess, check for fix/enable it via qSupported

jasonmolenda added a comment. In D79614#2027861 , @clayborg wrote: > Why not just fix qLaunchSuccess by passing the string through a > "escape_string(...)" function? Any packet that can return a string with > unknown content should be escaped correctly.

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D79614: Fix error reporting for qLaunchSuccess, check for fix/enable it via qSupported

jasonmolenda added a comment. In D79614#2027861 , @clayborg wrote: > Why not just fix qLaunchSuccess by passing the string through a > "escape_string(...)" function? Any packet that can return a string with > unknown content should be escaped correctly.

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D79614: Fix error reporting for qLaunchSuccess, check for fix/enable it via qSupported

clayborg added a comment. Why not just fix qLaunchSuccess by passing the string through a "escape_string(...)" function? Any packet that can return a string with unknown content should be escaped correctly. Adding a new packet doesn't really fix the problem in older debugserver/lldb-server

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D79614: Fix error reporting for qLaunchSuccess, check for fix/enable it via qSupported

jasonmolenda created this revision. jasonmolenda added reviewers: labath, clayborg. jasonmolenda added a project: LLDB. I've been experimenting with returning richer error messages in debugserver recently, and I found a bug the other day where qLaunchSuccess returns its error code with an "E"