From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-67762-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 14345 invoked by alias); 17 Oct 2009 08:07:44 -0000
Received: (qmail 14289 invoked by uid 22791); 17 Oct 2009 08:07:42 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.4 required=5.0 	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_SOFTFAIL
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from mtaout22.012.net.il (HELO mtaout22.012.net.il) (80.179.55.172)     by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sat, 17 Oct 2009 08:07:37 +0000
Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout22.012.net.il by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0KRN00800FSC1A00@a-mtaout22.012.net.il> for gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Sat, 17 Oct 2009 10:07:34 +0200 (IST)
Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([87.70.117.47]) by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0KRN004V4FWMNN60@a-mtaout22.012.net.il>; Sat, 17 Oct 2009 10:07:34 +0200 (IST)
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 08:07:00 -0000
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [RFA, 2 of 3] save/restore process record, part 2 (core ops target)
In-reply-to: <4AD91CDB.5060002@vmware.com>
To: Michael Snyder <msnyder@vmware.com>
Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, teawater@gmail.com
Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Message-id: <833a5iigxg.fsf@gnu.org>
References: <4AD91CDB.5060002@vmware.com>
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/msg00385.txt.bz2

> Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 18:24:43 -0700
> From: Michael Snyder <msnyder@vmware.com>
> 
> +  if (!tmp_to_resume)
> +    error (_("Process record can't get to_resume."));
> +  if (!tmp_to_wait)
> +    error (_("Process record can't get to_wait."));
> +  if (!tmp_to_store_registers)
> +    error (_("Process record can't get to_store_registers."));
> +  if (!tmp_to_insert_breakpoint)
> +    error (_("Process record can't get to_insert_breakpoint."));
> +  if (!tmp_to_remove_breakpoint)
> +    error (_("Process record can't get to_remove_breakpoint."));

Can we rephrase these to be more user-friendly?  As written, this text
is okay for debug printouts, but not for user-level error messages,
IMO.  (Yes, I know this text was in the old version, but still...)

> +  //if (strcmp (current_target.to_shortname, "record_core") == 0)
> +  //record_load ();

C++-style comments?

Thanks.