From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22165 invoked by alias); 12 Oct 2009 17:13:37 -0000 Received: (qmail 22156 invoked by uid 22791); 12 Oct 2009 17:13:37 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_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; Mon, 12 Oct 2009 17:13:33 +0000 Received: from int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n9CHDVaN015515; Mon, 12 Oct 2009 13:13:31 -0400 Received: from ns3.rdu.redhat.com (ns3.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.255.199]) by int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n9CHDUnD006826; Mon, 12 Oct 2009 13:13:31 -0400 Received: from opsy.redhat.com (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 n9CHDTQw012256; Mon, 12 Oct 2009 13:13:30 -0400 Received: by opsy.redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 500) id 9821A37828F; Mon, 12 Oct 2009 11:13:29 -0600 (MDT) From: Tom Tromey To: Michael Snyder Cc: gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [discuss] Process record -- save and restore to a file References: <4AD35518.9040606@vmware.com> Reply-To: tromey@redhat.com Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 17:13:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <4AD35518.9040606@vmware.com> (Michael Snyder's message of "Mon, 12 Oct 2009 09:11:04 -0700") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2009-10/txt/msg00212.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Michael" == Michael Snyder writes: Michael> I would like to remark that the "restore" UI is logical but not Michael> intuitive. I think it would be helpful to have a single command eg: Michael> (gdb) record load Michael> which would do the same as the "core" and "record" commands. Sounds good. Michael> Secondly, I have a suggestion about the command names. Michael> How about Michael> record save Michael> record restore Michael> instead of Michael> record dump Michael> record load Michael> What do you guys think? This also seems reasonable to me. Tom