Re: MI testsuite to use PTY for inferior

[Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>]

On Sun, Jul 31, 2005 at 05:20:21PM -0400, Bob Rossi wrote:
> What is GDB's stance on supporting target's via GDB/MI that can not support
> creating TTY's? Off the top of my head, I don't think it makes sense to
> support these targets. You can not write a reliable FE under theses
> circumstances. The inferior can spew out anything it chooses, including
> partial MI fragments (if inferior == GDB).
> 
> >   - As far as I know, native Win32 targets can't use PTYs:
> >       http://world.std.com/~jmhart/critcom.htm#UNIX%20Pseudoterminal
> >     So, they'll probably need something different.
> 
> In this scenario, I think Cygwin is the answer. Or use GDB/MI with an
> inferior program that doesn't output anything to the terminal.

That's probably what usually happens.  I don't know.  I can't say it's
a priority for me.

> >   - Remote targets that provide output currently aren't redirected onto
> >     the PTY; instead they'll appear interleaved, just like before.
> 
> In this scenario, I'm guessing from the sound of it that GDB just hasn't
> added support for this yet. So it's a GDB bug, right? I could look into
> this if I had some direction.

I don't know.  What do you want it to do?  GDB to set up a fake
terminal and push output to it?  Might make sense, might not, haven't
thought about it.

> > Also, Andrew pretty specifically asked you to leave the mi2-* tests
> > alone for this change.
> 
> Well, he definatly was against it at first, and then I thought maybe he
> was changing his mind,
> 
>    http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/2005-02/msg00110.html

I don't think Andrew's concern in that message is related, but you
could ask him.  In any case I think that this is yet another way in
which we ought to leave the MI2 tests alone.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC