From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-67921-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 26000 invoked by alias); 22 Oct 2009 20:24:57 -0000
Received: (qmail 25992 invoked by uid 22791); 22 Oct 2009 20:24:56 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0 	tests=AWL,BAYES_00
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/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 22 Oct 2009 20:24:52 +0000
Received: from mailhost4.vmware.com (mailhost4.vmware.com [10.16.67.124]) 	by smtp-outbound-1.vmware.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13DD356018; 	Thu, 22 Oct 2009 13:24:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.20.94.141] (msnyder-server.eng.vmware.com [10.20.94.141]) 	by mailhost4.vmware.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08BC5C9CCA; 	Thu, 22 Oct 2009 13:24:49 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <4AE0BE00.1030304@vmware.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2009 20:24:00 -0000
From: Michael Snyder <msnyder@vmware.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.12 (X11/20080411)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Pedro Alves <pedro@codesourcery.com>
CC: "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>,   Hui Zhu <teawater@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] testing specifically for process record
References: <4ADD0105.6080000@vmware.com> <4AE0B4BD.5050408@vmware.com> <200910222117.49396.pedro@codesourcery.com>
In-Reply-To: <200910222117.49396.pedro@codesourcery.com>
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: <gdb-patches.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2009-10/txt/msg00544.txt.bz2

Pedro Alves wrote:
> On Thursday 22 October 2009 20:38:37, Michael Snyder wrote:
>> gdb_test "record" "" "Turn on process record"
>> # FIXME: command ought to acknowledge, so we can test if it succeeded.
> 
> This can now be switched to gdb_test_multiple, assuming success
> iff the command was silent, and then followed by "info record"
> reporting that recording is in effect.  Of course, all
> that done in a neat reusable function in lib/gdb.exp.  Any
> takers?  :-)
> 

Hmm, that's good... unfortunately "record" will succeed even
for a remote target, so it doesn't help me with the larger
problem of detecting remote vs. native.  We want to avoid using
the process-record commands if we're remote (eg. Simics).