From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14010 invoked by alias); 13 May 2002 01:22:03 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 13999 invoked from network); 13 May 2002 01:22:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nevyn.them.org) (128.2.145.6) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 13 May 2002 01:22:01 -0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1774XC-0004im-00; Sun, 12 May 2002 21:21:54 -0400 Date: Sun, 12 May 2002 18:22:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Andrew Cagney Cc: Michael Snyder , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFA] Remote UDP support Message-ID: <20020513012154.GB17951@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Andrew Cagney , Michael Snyder , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <20020509005348.GA14040@nevyn.them.org> <3CD9E563.3000704@cygnus.com> <20020509030123.GA7864@nevyn.them.org> <3CDABEB1.5008A502@redhat.com> <20020509184410.GA28420@nevyn.them.org> <3CDAE78A.7080508@cygnus.com> <20020509212046.GA3964@nevyn.them.org> <3CDD6D3E.90809@cygnus.com> <20020511213218.GA8246@nevyn.them.org> <3CDD94DB.8070409@cygnus.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3CDD94DB.8070409@cygnus.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i X-SW-Source: 2002-05/txt/msg00434.txt.bz2 On Sat, May 11, 2002 at 06:02:03PM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote: > >On Sat, May 11, 2002 at 03:13:02PM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote: > > > >>>No. I think it need to be in the users face. I don't think GDB should > > > >>>>silently let the user to use a broken mechanism. > > > >>> > >>> > >>>I really don't agree, but your call. Could I at least persuade you > >>>down to a one-line warning and no confirmation query? > > > >> > >>Oh! All right then :-) > > > > > >How's this look? I wasn't quite sure what to put in the text of the > >warning. Also added one to the manual. > > Problem is, its in the wrong place, and I suspect getting it into the > right place - remote.c - is tricky. > > I think adding a FIXME hack to remote.c (search for serial_open) that > checks for ``udp:'' and then print a warning is the most pratical. I don't understand. Why hoist it up into remote.c, before each call to serial_open? That just descends through serial_open to call net_open and the warning would arrive at the same position; the warning is specific to ser-tcp, and seems to belong there. Perhaps if you explain what you're trying to accomplish by having it somewhere else. -- Daniel Jacobowitz Carnegie Mellon University MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer