From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12207 invoked by alias); 1 Nov 2011 16:20:01 -0000 Received: (qmail 12134 invoked by uid 22791); 1 Nov 2011 16:20:00 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-7.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Nov 2011 16:19:40 +0000 Received: from int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id pA1GJeBp024995 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Tue, 1 Nov 2011 12:19:40 -0400 Received: from ns3.rdu.redhat.com (ns3.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.255.199]) by int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id pA1GJeZS012471; Tue, 1 Nov 2011 12:19:40 -0400 Received: from barimba (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by ns3.rdu.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id pA1GJctQ016151; Tue, 1 Nov 2011 12:19:39 -0400 From: Tom Tromey To: Jan Kratochvil Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Marek Polacek Subject: Re: [patch] testsuite: MI: racy results in async mode #2 References: <20111027101544.GA5288@host1.jankratochvil.net> <20111028083256.GA8281@host1.jankratochvil.net> <20111029100900.GA5767@host1.jankratochvil.net> Date: Tue, 01 Nov 2011 16:20:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20111029100900.GA5767@host1.jankratochvil.net> (Jan Kratochvil's message of "Sat, 29 Oct 2011 12:09:00 +0200") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.90 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain 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: 2011-11/txt/msg00013.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Jan" == Jan Kratochvil writes: Jan> Therefore proposing the attached way. I think if it works then it is clearly better than what we have now. One other idea would be to send an "output" command so that you could match some known output to sync up correctly. I'm not sure if this would always work though. Tom