From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26465 invoked by alias); 20 Jul 2009 14:24:49 -0000 Received: (qmail 26457 invoked by uid 22791); 20 Jul 2009 14:24:49 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SARE_MSGID_LONG40,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail-pz0-f203.google.com (HELO mail-pz0-f203.google.com) (209.85.222.203) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 20 Jul 2009 14:24:41 +0000 Received: by pzk41 with SMTP id 41so1823396pzk.12 for ; Mon, 20 Jul 2009 07:24:40 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.143.163.12 with SMTP id q12mr952366wfo.125.1248099880104; Mon, 20 Jul 2009 07:24:40 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <200907201416.25823.pedro@codesourcery.com> References: <4A5930EE.3040201@vmware.com> <6D19CA8D71C89C43A057926FE0D4ADAA07B71A3E@ecamlmw720.eamcs.ericsson.se> <200907201416.25823.pedro@codesourcery.com> From: Hui Zhu Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2009 14:42:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Testing of reverse debug commands To: Pedro Alves Cc: Marc Khouzam , Michael Snyder , Jan Kratochvil , Joel Brobecker , gdb-patches ml Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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: 2009-07/txt/msg00481.txt.bz2 On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 21:16, Pedro Alves wrote: > On Monday 13 July 2009 04:31:37, Hui Zhu wrote: >> On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 03:25, Marc Khouzam w= rote: >> >> Pedro Alves wrote: >> >> > >> >> > (gdb) >> >> > record stop >> >> > &"record stop\n" >> >> > ~"Process record is not started.\n" >> >> > ^done >> >> > (gdb) >> >> >> >> > So, I think some improvement would be nice for frontends. >> >> >> >> So, is this really an error? =A0Hui seems to have thought >> >> it wasn't. =A0Hui? =A0If it is, then it's just a matter of >> >> changing the corresponding printf_unfiltered calls in >> >> record.c to `error' calls (look for the "Process record >> >> is..." string). >> >> Then MI will get an ^error,msg=3D"foo", instead of a ~"foo" + ^done. >> > >> > That would be more consistent for a frontend. =A0The frontend >> > can then decide if this should be reported as an error or simply >> > accepted. =A0But that is not such a big deal anymore, now that >> > you pointed out 'record' itself does report an error. >> > >> >> I think the record's query and something is make a lot of troubles. >> I make a patch for it. =A0Please help me with it. > > I got confused, since this isn't answering the question I asked. > > This particular issue will be resolved when the query/nquery/yquery/MI > discussion reaches a conclusion, yes? =A0Or is this an independent change? > Do note that we have other CLI commands that query and default to > a "destructive" 'yes', like "run -> attach (kill?)", for example. > Maybe you should post this in its own new thread. > > I think it would be nice if we crafted a GDB HIG. =A0Do we have > something of the sorts already? > Actually, I got confused too. Sorry for that. This is a long ... thread. Somebody told about query, somebody told about error. I send a patch to show my idea with it. Maybe some people can help me with it. :) Thanks, Hui