RE: gdb reverse execution: how to actually run tests for it?

["Jakob Engblom" <jakob@virtutech.com>]

> Pedro> For the generic reverse execution tests --- reverse step, reverse
> Pedro> next, reverse continue, run to breakpoint in reverse, etc., etc.,
> Pedro> I'd must prefer that we would get rid of the need for board files
> Pedro> at all.  :-)
> 
> Pedro>  1. for native targets, the only reverse solution we currently support
is
> Pedro>  precord.  I can't see why we can't default to testing the reverse
tests
> Pedro>  with precord then.
> 
> I agree.
> 
> If the tests aren't enabled by default on some common platforms and thus
> run as a regular part of testing, you can be sure there will be
> regressions here.

So the question here is: who will deal with removing the board file dependency?
I don't think we and our consultants doing the work for us are competent
enough...

So is it OK if we submit a kit of tests which are structured in the same way as
the current reverse tests? Then we can deal with upgrading the tests later, once
the board file requirements has been fixed?


Best regards,

/jakob

_______________________________________________________

Jakob Engblom, PhD, Technical Marketing Manager

Virtutech                   Direct: +46 8 690 07 47   
Drottningholmsvägen 22      Mobile: +46 709 242 646  
11243 Stockholm             Web:    www.virtutech.com 
Sweden
________________________________________________________