Re: [RFC] testing specifically for process record

[Pedro Alves <pedro at codesourcery dot com>]

On Thursday 22 October 2009 21:18:08, Michael Snyder wrote:
> Pedro Alves wrote:
> > On Thursday 22 October 2009 20:38:37, Michael Snyder wrote:
> >> gdb_test "record" "" "Turn on process record"
> >> # FIXME: command ought to acknowledge, so we can test if it succeeded.
> > 
> > This can now be switched to gdb_test_multiple, assuming success
> > iff the command was silent, and then followed by "info record"
> > reporting that recording is in effect.  Of course, all
> > that done in a neat reusable function in lib/gdb.exp.  Any
> > takers?  :-)
> > 
> 
> Hmm, that's good... unfortunately "record" will succeed even
> for a remote target, so it doesn't help me with the larger
> problem of detecting remote vs. native.  We want to avoid using
> the process-record commands if we're remote (eg. Simics).

My remark was directed at the FIXME quoted above only.

-- 
Pedro Alves