From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 31186 invoked by alias); 26 Mar 2005 13:43:50 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 31132 invoked from network); 26 Mar 2005 13:43:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO romy.inter.net.il) (192.114.186.66) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 26 Mar 2005 13:43:43 -0000 Received: from zaretski (IGLD-80-230-9-205.inter.net.il [80.230.9.205]) by romy.inter.net.il (MOS 3.5.6-GR) with ESMTP id AVL40352 (AUTH halo1); Sat, 26 Mar 2005 15:42:22 +0200 (IST) Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 13:43:00 -0000 From: "Eli Zaretskii" To: "Dennis Brueni" Message-ID: <01c53209$Blat.v2.4$4d72f0c0@zahav.net.il> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 CC: bob@brasko.net, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, "dbrueni@slickedit.com" (dbrueni@slickedit.com) Subject: Re: [RFC] fullname attribute for GDB/MI stack frames Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii References: X-SW-Source: 2005-03/txt/msg00338.txt.bz2 > Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 15:48:45 -0500 > From: "Dennis Brueni" > Cc: , > "Dennis Brueni" > > *** gdb/doc/gdb.texinfo 10 Mar 2005 13:12:33 -0000 1.233 > --- gdb/doc/gdb.texinfo 24 Mar 2005 18:34:13 -0000 > *************** Setting a watchpoint on a variable in th > *** 15894,15900 **** > ^running > ^done,reason="watchpoint-trigger",wpt=@{number="2",exp="x"@}, > value=@{old="-268439212",new="55"@}, > ! frame=@{func="main",args=[],file="recursive2.c",line="5"@} > (@value{GDBP}) > @end smallexample > > --- 15894,15900 ---- > ^running > ^done,reason="watchpoint-trigger",wpt=@{number="2",exp="x"@}, > value=@{old="-268439212",new="55"@}, > ! > frame=@{func="main",args=[],file="recursive2.c",fullname="/.../recursive > 2.c",line="5"@} Your mail software breaks long lines, which will be an annoyance for whoever tries to apply these patches. Please resend the patches while taking care that long lines are sent intact, TIA. > ^done,reason="watchpoint-trigger", > wpt=@{number="5",exp="C"@},value=@{old="-276895068",new="3"@}, > frame=@{func="callee4",args=[], > ! file="../../../devo/gdb/testsuite/gdb.mi/basics.c",line="13"@} > (@value{GDBP}) > -exec-continue > ^running > ^done,reason="watchpoint-scope",wpnum="5", > frame=@{func="callee3",args=[@{name="strarg", > value="0x11940 \"A string argument.\""@}], > ! file="../../../devo/gdb/testsuite/gdb.mi/basics.c",line="18"@} > (@value{GDBP}) > @end smallexample > > --- 15912,15927 ---- > ^done,reason="watchpoint-trigger", > wpt=@{number="5",exp="C"@},value=@{old="-276895068",new="3"@}, > frame=@{func="callee4",args=[], > ! file="../../../devo/gdb/testsuite/gdb.mi/basics.c", > ! fullname="/devo/gdb/testsuite/gdb.mi/basics.c",line="13"@} > (@value{GDBP}) > -exec-continue > ^running > ^done,reason="watchpoint-scope",wpnum="5", > frame=@{func="callee3",args=[@{name="strarg", > value="0x11940 \"A string argument.\""@}], > ! file="../../../devo/gdb/testsuite/gdb.mi/basics.c", > ! fullname="/devo/gdb/testsuite/gdb.mi/basics.c",line="18"@} > (@value{GDBP}) > @end smallexample I think these changes are confusing: the full name for "../../../devo/gdb/testsuite/gdb.mi/basics.c" cannot possibly be "/devo/gdb/testsuite/gdb.mi/basics.c" unless "../../.." resolves to the root directory. While the latter is a possibility, it's a very rare occasion, so it is better to replace "../../.." with something like "/foo/bar/", not with "/". The way you did it, a user could misunderstand what fullname= does: your examples look like it simply removes "../../.." part. > (@value{GDBP}) > *stopped,reason="breakpoint-hit",bkptno="1",frame=@{func="main", > ! args=[],file="try.c",line="5"@} > (@value{GDBP}) > -data-list-changed-registers > ^done,changed-registers=["0","1","2","4","5","6","7","8","9", > --- 16211,16217 ---- > > (@value{GDBP}) > *stopped,reason="breakpoint-hit",bkptno="1",frame=@{func="main", > ! args=[],file="try.c",fullname="/.../try.c",line="5"@} Here, I don't understand the "/.../" part. Did you mean for the 3 dots to stand for the omitted full path from the root? If so, it's less confusuing to use some invented file names, like /foo/bar/baz or /dir/subdir/subsubdir. Other than that, the doco patch is approved. Thanks.