From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11406 invoked by alias); 23 Sep 2004 18:29:50 -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 11308 invoked from network); 23 Sep 2004 18:29:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 23 Sep 2004 18:29:47 -0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.12.11/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i8NITld4001960 for ; Thu, 23 Sep 2004 14:29:47 -0400 Received: from localhost.redhat.com (porkchop.devel.redhat.com [172.16.58.2]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i8NITar30123; Thu, 23 Sep 2004 14:29:41 -0400 Received: from gnu.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D0C828D2; Thu, 23 Sep 2004 14:27:20 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <41531588.3040308@gnu.org> Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2004 18:29:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-GB; rv:1.4.1) Gecko/20040831 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Michael Chastain Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [rfa/testsuite] Get the inferior to dump core References: <414EE841.7080908@gnu.org> <4152F35E.nail1HN1VVA80@mindspring.com> In-Reply-To: <4152F35E.nail1HN1VVA80@mindspring.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2004-09/txt/msg00380.txt.bz2 > This patch is approved. Tks, I'll commit shortly. > I had wondered about that technique of bigcore.exp, it surprised me a > bit when I saw that it was making two runs of the inferior. > > >>> Is this ok? I just wonder if it should be generalized and moved to >>> gdb.exp, I guess that should be a separate pass. > > > I don't know exactly what "it" is referring to, but a separate pass > for moving "it" to gdb.exp sounds good to me. The sequence needed to first generate and then locate/rename a corefile from an inferior running under GDB (instead of running the program twice). > I like what corefile.exp tries to do. It creates a unique subdirectory > and runs the target program in the subdirectory so that the core file > is easy to find. It suffers from build != host problems though. but it (and I'm sure there are others) suffers from corefile != inferior problems and I'm pretty sure all duplicated corefile's logic. Andrew