From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27880 invoked by alias); 7 Aug 2009 09:53:01 -0000 Received: (qmail 27871 invoked by uid 22791); 7 Aug 2009 09:53:01 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_JMF_BL,SPF_SOFTFAIL X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mtaout2.012.net.il (HELO mtaout2.012.net.il) (84.95.2.4) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 07 Aug 2009 09:52:48 +0000 Received: from conversion-daemon.i_mtaout2.012.net.il by i_mtaout2.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2004.12) id <0KO000A003BI0Q00@i_mtaout2.012.net.il> for gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Fri, 07 Aug 2009 12:52:45 +0300 (IDT) Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([77.126.151.173]) by i_mtaout2.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2004.12) with ESMTPA id <0KO000LQY3FWPAH0@i_mtaout2.012.net.il>; Fri, 07 Aug 2009 12:52:45 +0300 (IDT) Date: Fri, 07 Aug 2009 12:51:00 -0000 From: Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: [RFA/RFC] Add dump and load command to process record and replay In-reply-to: To: Hui Zhu Cc: msnyder@vmware.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii Message-id: <83prb8lzmc.fsf@gnu.org> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT References: <4A79F802.4060102@vmware.com> <83ab2docqi.fsf@gnu.org> <4A7B99B3.40407@vmware.com> <4A7B9F49.9030202@vmware.com> <83ws5gm30b.fsf@gnu.org> 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: 2009-08/txt/msg00107.txt.bz2 > From: Hui Zhu > Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2009 17:21:57 +0800 > Cc: msnyder@vmware.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org > > On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 16:39, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > >> From: Hui Zhu > >> Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2009 11:34:20 +0800 > >> Cc: Eli Zaretskii , "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" > >> > >> I think a warning is clear to most of people. > >> > >> And when he get this warning.  He can delete the record list and load > >> again.  He will lost nothing. > >> > >> If we delete the old record list, maybe he still need old record.  He > >> will lost something. > > > > Instead of a warning, how about asking the user whether to discard the > > old records or keep them? > > > > Agree. What about a query? Sorry, I'm not sure I understand the question. If you are asking how to word the question we ask the user, here's my proposal: Keep the existing execution log? (yes or no) I think the default should be NO, so that this does TRT when invoked non-interactively. If you agree, you need to use `nquery' for this question.