Re: set/show remotestopbits

Fernando Nasser
2001-09-26T13:18:00Z

Andrew Cagney wrote:
>
> > Anyway, I agree with Andrew's argument that some parameters are
> > not necessarily tied to the remote protocol. With that argument in mind,
> > the remoteXXXX's cause a little confusion ("remote target" vs. "remote
> > target that uses the remote protocol" -- "remote" seems to be
> overloaded).
> >
> > Serial and parallel sound nice. What if we have some things that can
> > apply to any "remote" (non-native) target and is not specific to the
> > communication link. (I am trying to think of an example -- the name of
> > a log file, perhaps? Can you think of some other one?).
>
> Perhaphs ``set remote ..'' should have been ``set target remote ...'' or
> ``set protocol remote ...'' or ``set remote-protocol ...''. (But
> remote-protocol is also poorly defined).
>
> Anyway, the entire syntax will need to be reviewed again soon. At
> present GDB assumes a single active target with a single interface.
> While it doesn't need to be solved now, we do need to start thinking
> about multiple targets with multiple interfaces and how to specify them.
> for instance, how to show the serial settings for interface foo.
>
> I'll add the framework for ``set serial ''' and PR the need to deprecate
> ``set remotebaud''.
>

Great.

We will wait for you to do the "kick-off" for the syntax change debate.

Regards,
Fernando

--
Fernando Nasser
Red Hat - Toronto E-Mail: fnasser@redhat.com
2323 Yonge Street, Suite #300
Toronto, Ontario M4P 2C9