Re: set/show remotestopbits

[Andrew Cagney <ac131313 at cygnus dot com>]

 > Anyway, I agree with Andrew's argument that some parameters are
 > not necessarily tied to the remote protocol.  With that argument in mind,
 > the remoteXXXX's cause a little confusion ("remote target" vs. "remote
 > target that uses the remote protocol" -- "remote" seems to be 
overloaded).
 >
 > Serial and parallel sound nice.  What if we have some things that can
 > apply to any "remote" (non-native) target and is not specific to the
 > communication link.  (I am trying to think of an example -- the name of
 > a log file, perhaps?  Can you think of some other one?).

Perhaphs ``set remote ..'' should have been ``set target remote ...'' or 
``set protocol remote ...'' or ``set remote-protocol ...''.  (But 
remote-protocol is also poorly defined).

Anyway, the entire syntax will need to be reviewed again soon.  At 
present GDB assumes a single active target with a single interface. 
While it doesn't need to be solved now, we do need to start thinking 
about multiple targets with multiple interfaces and how to specify them. 
  for instance, how to show the serial settings for interface foo.

I'll add the framework for ``set serial ''' and PR the need to deprecate 
``set remotebaud''.

enjoy,
Andrew