From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-return-38522-listarch-gdb=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 27539 invoked by alias); 13 Jan 2011 19:04:16 -0000
Received: (qmail 27526 invoked by uid 22791); 13 Jan 2011 19:04:15 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.7 required=5.0	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from smtp-outbound-1.vmware.com (HELO smtp-outbound-1.vmware.com) (65.115.85.69)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 13 Jan 2011 19:04:10 +0000
Received: from mailhost3.vmware.com (mailhost3.vmware.com [10.16.27.45])	by smtp-outbound-1.vmware.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACC501346E;	Thu, 13 Jan 2011 11:04:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: from msnyder-server.eng.vmware.com (promd-2s-dhcp138.eng.vmware.com [10.20.124.138])	by mailhost3.vmware.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A501CCD96F;	Thu, 13 Jan 2011 11:04:09 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <4D2F4CA9.1010105@vmware.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2011 19:04:00 -0000
From: Michael Snyder <msnyder@vmware.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (X11/20101201)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Nathan Froyd <froydnj@codesourcery.com>
CC: "gdb@sourceware.org" <gdb@sourceware.org>
Subject: Re: Question re: testsuite, "isnative", "is_remote" etc.
References: <4D2E35C5.60206@vmware.com> <20110113184025.GO6247@codesourcery.com>
In-Reply-To: <20110113184025.GO6247@codesourcery.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2011-01/txt/msg00046.txt.bz2

Nathan Froyd wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 03:14:13PM -0800, Michael Snyder wrote:
>> What's the recommended way of skipping a test case if it shouldn't run  
>> remotely?
> 
> I used [target_info exists use_gdb_stub] last time I fixed a test like
> this (gdb.base/break-entry.exp).


Yep, I've been tempted to use that too.  But I think "use_gdb_stub"
is still something different.  It was meant to refer to those old
stubs like i386-stub.c, not to gdbserver.  There used to be some
magic that you had to do, like this in break.c:

int
main (int argc, char **argv, char **envp)
{
#ifdef usestubs
     set_debug_traps();  /* set breakpoint 5 here */
     breakpoint();
#endif

and "use_gdb_stubs" was the corresponding bit for the .exp file.

I don't think it applies (or should apply) to gdbserver.