From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13070 invoked by alias); 18 Oct 2008 02:20:42 -0000 Received: (qmail 13062 invoked by uid 22791); 18 Oct 2008 02:20:42 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from ti-out-0910.google.com (HELO ti-out-0910.google.com) (209.85.142.190) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Sat, 18 Oct 2008 02:20:07 +0000 Received: by ti-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id d10so436565tib.12 for ; Fri, 17 Oct 2008 19:20:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.110.20.15 with SMTP id 15mr3482332tit.28.1224296404029; Fri, 17 Oct 2008 19:20:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.110.42.9 with HTTP; Fri, 17 Oct 2008 19:20:03 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2008 02:20:00 -0000 From: teawater To: "Michael Snyder" Subject: Re: [reverse RFA] Remove process record warning code Cc: gdb-patches In-Reply-To: <48F941C2.1010200@vmware.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <48F8CA2C.2070903@vmware.com> <48F941C2.1010200@vmware.com> 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/msg00457.txt.bz2 Add it in current time maybe make code not very clear. Maybe I can add it back in the future. On Sat, Oct 18, 2008 at 09:54, Michael Snyder wrote: > 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 (); >>> > >