From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8411 invoked by alias); 10 Nov 2009 19:12:38 -0000 Received: (qmail 8402 invoked by uid 22791); 10 Nov 2009 19:12:38 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from NaN.false.org (HELO nan.false.org) (208.75.86.248) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 10 Nov 2009 19:12:33 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B78F710D7F; Tue, 10 Nov 2009 19:12:31 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (209.195.188.212.nauticom.net [209.195.188.212]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 973DB10D7C; Tue, 10 Nov 2009 19:12:31 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1N7w8l-0004aI-18; Tue, 10 Nov 2009 14:12:31 -0500 Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 19:12:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Nathan Sidwell Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: fileio test Message-ID: <20091110191231.GA17009@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Nathan Sidwell , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <4AF313A2.3000907@codesourcery.com> <20091109201406.GA9160@caradoc.them.org> <4AF94694.1090601@codesourcery.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4AF94694.1090601@codesourcery.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2009-11/txt/msg00222.txt.bz2 On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 10:55:16AM +0000, Nathan Sidwell wrote: > It's not obvious to me how the testsuite could distinguish between > these two cases. remote-fileio.c doesn't have any verbose logging we > could turn on (and have the testsuite watch for it). I suppose we > could add it. Or we could turn on remote-protocol logging and watch > for that (which seems less desirable). > > Thoughts? I'm not sure either. I like the idea of adding logging to remote-fileio.c; we could use that to disable the test if not using semihosting. (Although that risks turning this to UNSUPPORTED if semihosting is completely broken...) -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery