From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29101 invoked by alias); 31 Jul 2005 13:16:59 -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 28962 invoked by uid 22791); 31 Jul 2005 13:16:55 -0000 Received: from eastrmmtao06.cox.net (HELO eastrmmtao06.cox.net) (68.230.240.33) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with ESMTP; Sun, 31 Jul 2005 13:16:55 +0000 Received: from white ([68.9.64.121]) by eastrmmtao06.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.04.00 201-2131-118-20041027) with ESMTP id <20050731131637.NET1531.eastrmmtao06.cox.net@white>; Sun, 31 Jul 2005 09:16:37 -0400 Received: from bob by white with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1DzDgT-0006BW-00; Sun, 31 Jul 2005 09:16:53 -0400 Date: Sun, 31 Jul 2005 13:16:00 -0000 From: Bob Rossi To: Nick Roberts , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: MI testsuite to use PTY for inferior Message-ID: <20050731131653.GC22547@white> Mail-Followup-To: Nick Roberts , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <17131.5769.342629.658975@farnswood.snap.net.nz> <20050730173855.GA21401@white> <17131.64575.780190.163527@farnswood.snap.net.nz> <20050730230309.GA22547@white> <20050731012111.GB13808@nevyn.them.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050731012111.GB13808@nevyn.them.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i X-SW-Source: 2005-07/txt/msg00236.txt.bz2 On Sat, Jul 30, 2005 at 09:21:11PM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > On Sat, Jul 30, 2005 at 07:03:09PM -0400, Bob Rossi wrote: > > However, since that's pretty ugly, I'll take your suggestion and always > > create and assign inferior_pty a value. Then I'll check it for the value > > of "true" before executing any code. > > I recommend doing something different. Make the argument a flag, i.e. > "mi_gdb_start use-tty". Or "no-tty" depending on what you want the > default to be. If it would be OK, I'd prefer to just have the TTY work with all MI tests, not making it optional. I'd like to repost the patch with all of the problems found already, and with that additional change. Is this OK? My theory is that no FE can/should use MI with out separating the inferior output via a pty. So, it's OK to test GDB under these assumptions. Here is the original patch with Andrew's comments on this, from a while back, http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/2005-02/msg00085.html Thanks, Bob Rossi