RE: gdb command line option -e or -exec usage

[Paragi, Ajeykumar B]

Thank you!
Then why -e command line option is present when -se or gdb <exec-name> does the 
job.
Is it to load the symbol file which we like to..?

Regards,
Ajay

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Eli Zaretskii [mailto:address@hidden
>Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2010 1:36 AM
>To: Michael Snyder
>Cc: address@hidden; address@hidden; Paragi, Ajeykumar B;
>address@hidden
>Subject: Re: gdb command line option -e or -exec usage
>
>> Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2010 11:10:08 -0800
>> From: Michael Snyder <address@hidden>
>> CC: "address@hidden" <address@hidden>,   "Paragi, Ajeykumar B"
><address@hidden>,  "address@hidden" <address@hidden>
>>
>> Pedro Alves wrote:
>> > On Friday 12 February 2010 18:45:01, Michael Snyder wrote:
>> >> Paragi, Ajeykumar B wrote:
>> >>> Hi,
>> >>>
>> >>> I have invoked gdb with '-e' command line option on an executable,
>> >>> The gdb manual says '-e' is used to set the executable to run.
>> >>> But I could not see the symbols read in by gdb when I use -e and
>could
>> >>> not insert breakpoints.
>> >>>
>> >>> What is the intent of having the command line option "-e" or "-
>exec"?
>> >> Hmmm, it does seem to be broken.
>> >
>> > It's not.  `-e' is equivalent to "(gdb) exec-file".  It doesn't read
>> > its argument for symbols, only for executable to run, or for pure
>> > memory contents.
>> >
>> >> You can get the same effect, though, by just leaving out the -e flag.
>> >>
>> >>      % gdb my-executable
>> >
>> > That's equivalent to "(gdb) file", which is equivalent to
>> > "gdb -e my-executable -s my-executable", or just "gdb -se my-
>executable".
>> >
>>
>> Right!  Thanks, Pedro.
>
>Are we missing something on the manual regarding this?