From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17500 invoked by alias); 18 Oct 2008 01:58:39 -0000 Received: (qmail 17490 invoked by uid 22791); 18 Oct 2008 01:58:39 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from smtp-outbound-1.vmware.com (HELO smtp-outbound-1.vmware.com) (65.115.85.69) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Sat, 18 Oct 2008 01:58:03 +0000 Received: from mailhost4.vmware.com (mailhost4.vmware.com [10.16.67.124]) by smtp-outbound-1.vmware.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D7B113404; Fri, 17 Oct 2008 18:58:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.20.92.59] (promb-2s-dhcp59.eng.vmware.com [10.20.92.59]) by mailhost4.vmware.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 34F5EC9A17; Fri, 17 Oct 2008 18:58:01 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <48F941C2.1010200@vmware.com> Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2008 01:58:00 -0000 From: Michael Snyder User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.12 (X11/20080411) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: teawater CC: gdb-patches Subject: Re: [reverse RFA] Remove process record warning code References: <48F8CA2C.2070903@vmware.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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: 2008-10/txt/msg00456.txt.bz2 I'm worried that the naive user might think that he can extend a recording session across several runs. Might seem counter-intuitive, but I think the SID reverse execution implementation will allow you to do that. If you run the inferior multiple times, you can actually "back up" into a previous execution. I know Process Record won't let you do that, I'm just saying, a user's intuition is not necessarily the same as yours or mine... teawater wrote: > I think user already know P record will stop when inferior exit. So... > > How do you think about it? > > > On Sat, Oct 18, 2008 at 01:23, Michael Snyder wrote: >> You don't think you need this special warning? >> >> teawater wrote: >>> Hi Michael, >>> >>> 2008-10-17 Hui Zhu >>> >>> * infcmd.c (kill_if_already_running): Remove process record >>> warning code. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Hui >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>> --- a/ChangeLog >>> +++ b/ChangeLog >>> @@ -1,3 +1,8 @@ >>> +2008-10-17 Hui Zhu >>> + >>> + * infcmd.c (kill_if_already_running): Remove process record >>> + warning code. >>> + >>> 2008-10-15 Hui Zhu >>> Change "record-auto-delete" to "record-stop-at-limit". >>> --- a/infcmd.c >>> +++ b/infcmd.c >>> @@ -51,7 +51,6 @@ >>> #include "exceptions.h" >>> #include "cli/cli-decode.h" >>> #include "gdbthread.h" >>> -#include "record.h" >>> /* Functions exported for general use, in inferior.h: */ >>> @@ -427,12 +426,8 @@ kill_if_already_running (int from_tty) >>> restart it. */ >>> target_require_runnable (); >>> - if (from_tty) >>> - if (!query (RECORD_IS_USED ? >>> - "The program being debugged has been started >>> already,\n\ >>> -and is running in record/replay mode. Do you want to abandon\n\ >>> -the recording and start the program from the beginning? " : >>> - "The program being debugged has been started >>> already.\n\ >>> + if (from_tty >>> + && !query ("The program being debugged has been started >>> already.\n\ >>> Start it from the beginning? ")) >>> error (_("Program not restarted.")); >>> target_kill (); >>