RE: Reverse debugging

Marc Khouzam
2009-07-17T14:12:21Z

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Nick Roberts [mailto:nickrob@snap.net.nz]
> Sent: July-16-09 10:42 PM
> To: Marc Khouzam
> Cc: Hui Zhu; gdb@sources.redhat.com; Michael Snyder
> Subject: RE: Reverse debugging
>
> > So in your case you are dealing with a proper tty?
> > For eclipse, we fall in the !from_tty case.
>
> Emacs communicates with GDB through a pseudo-tty. How does Eclipse
> do it?
>
> This also seems contrary to what Daniel Jacobowitz has
> previously told me,
> perhaps about Eclipse more generally. CDT has a console and
> I thought he
> assured me that there was interest in developing that functionality.

We do have a console and we do want it to be fully supported :-)
But all commands sent from the console are redirected through
our normal MI channel and I think this is the reason we
are not a tty in that case.

For example when turning off record from that console or from
the eclipse buttons I get:
"Delete recorded log and stop recording?(y or n) [answered Y; input not
from terminal]"

I noticed that the previous CDT GDB integration has its console
considered
a tty. It may be worth looking into the difference... when time allows
it :-)

>
> > Frontends should definetely not be bothered with those queries.
> > In my mind, a FE should know what it is doing so if it requests
> > an action like 'record stop' it should not be prompted at all.
> > This is probably true for any of these queries.
> >
> > I was originally going to ask Hui always have a !from_tty check,
> > but now it seems this would not work for emacs.
> >
> > Can we check if the default interpreter is MI somehow and in those
> > cases not do the query? The idea is that if one uses MI then
> > it is not in some user-interactive session.
> >
> > Just a thought...
>
> That might be a good idea but this request isn't for Emacs on
> trunk, which has
> now migrated fully to GDB/MI, but for the release branch
> which still uses
> annotations.

So you start GDB in CLI mode?
My idea was that if gdb is started with '-interpreter mi', we could
assume it is a frontend that started it and not use queries.

> It's just a small request for a slight change
> to the existing
> command "record stop" or, as Hui suggested, adding a special
> CLI command
> to stop recording that doesn't need confirmation.

I have nothing against that. How about making this command MI?

Marc