It does send '$T05...' in response, but it looks like lldb does not analyze responses to manually sent packets.
On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 1:02 PM, Greg Clayton <clayb...@gmail.com> wrote: > If you do a reverse step it actually should send a process resumed and a > process stopped event. > > > On Aug 18, 2017, at 7:19 PM, Vadim via lldb-dev <lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org> > wrote: > > > > I'm trying to reverse-step. So I think I'd need to refresh all thread > states? > > > >> On Aug 18, 2017, at 4:50 PM, Jim Ingham <jing...@apple.com> wrote: > >> > >> No, there hasn't been a need for this. > >> > >> What commands are you planning to send? Or equivalently, how much > state are you expecting to change? > >> > >> Jim > >> > >>> On Aug 18, 2017, at 4:36 PM, Vadim Chugunov via lldb-dev < > lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org> wrote: > >>> > >>> Hi, > >>> Is there any way to force lldb to refresh it's internal record of > debuggee process state (as if it had just received a stop event)? I want > to send a custom command to remote gdb process stub (via `process plugin > packet send`). This works, but if the command alters debuggee state, lldb > won't know about it. > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> lldb-dev mailing list > >>> lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org > >>> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev > >> > > _______________________________________________ > > lldb-dev mailing list > > lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org > > http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev > >
_______________________________________________ lldb-dev mailing list lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev
