Re: [RFAv2] Ensure 'exec-file has changed' check has priority over 'exec-file-mismatch' check

[Philippe Waroquiers <philippe.waroquiers@skynet.be>]

On Sat, 2020-06-20 at 17:25 +0100, Pedro Alves wrote:
> On 6/4/20 9:42 PM, Philippe Waroquiers via Gdb-patches wrote:
> > This is version 2. Compared to first version:
> >    rebased to last master
> >    removed a comment duplicated by error
> >    'git add-ed' the attach3.c file I forgot.
> > 
> > Following the implementation of exec-file-mismatch based on build-id,
> > an attach to a process that runs a modified exec-file was triggering
> > the exec-file-mismatch handling, giving a warning such as:
> >   warning: Mismatch between current exec-file /bd/home/philippe/gdb/git/build_termours/gdb/testsuite/outputs/gdb.base/attach/attach
> >   and automatically determined exec-file /bd/home/philippe/gdb/git/build_termours/gdb/testsuite/outputs/gdb.base/attach/attach
> >   exec-file-mismatch handling is currently "ask"
> > as the build-ids differ when an exec-file is recompiled.
> 
> I wonder whether the warning should mention Build IDs, like
> 
> - warning: Mismatch between ...
> + warning: Build ID mismatch between ...
Effectively, it might be more precise for the user to explain how
the mismatch was detected.  And if ever we add other ways to
detect a mismatch, we then better give different warnings.

Now, maybe many users will not know what is a build ID,
and the more cryptic message might confuse them.

If mentioning build ID is deemed better, I can do the change.

> 
...
> So let's go with what you have.  Some comments on the testcase below.
> But otherwise, with those addressed, please go ahead and push.
Thanks for the review, pushed after addressing the comments.

Philippe