The gdbserver tracepoints patch I just posted doesn't
include disconnected tracing yet. Note what
happens then: [...]
This is because common code outside remote.c has no clue
whether the target supports or not disconnected tracing, and
just assumes it does. Exposing that property seems to
conflict a bit with the desire to allow
"set disconnected-tracing on" before actually being connected,
so, I've avoided doing it so far. Maybe we could get away with
a tristate "yes|no|not-known-yet-maybe".
WDYT? Shall I proceed with this as is? Would you like to
address this?