From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26536 invoked by alias); 15 Nov 2001 18:53:35 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.cygnus.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 26500 invoked from network); 15 Nov 2001 18:53:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO cygnus.com) (205.180.230.5) by sourceware.cygnus.com with SMTP; 15 Nov 2001 18:53:33 -0000 Received: from cse.cygnus.com (cse.cygnus.com [205.180.230.236]) by runyon.cygnus.com (8.8.7-cygnus/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA03361; Thu, 15 Nov 2001 10:53:30 -0800 (PST) Received: (from kev@localhost) by cse.cygnus.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id LAA01491; Thu, 15 Nov 2001 11:53:18 -0700 Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2001 11:57:00 -0000 From: Kevin Buettner Message-Id: <1011115185318.ZM1490@ocotillo.lan> In-Reply-To: Orjan Friberg "Re: Cross solib support; continued" (Nov 15, 7:23pm) References: <3BEAA3A0.586B3046@axis.com> <20011108110955.A12240@nevyn.them.org> <3BF4081B.D623EF2F@axis.com> X-Mailer: Z-Mail (4.0.1 13Jan97 Caldera) To: Orjan Friberg Subject: Re: Cross solib support; continued Cc: Daniel Jacobowitz , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-SW-Source: 2001-11/txt/msg00090.txt.bz2 On Nov 15, 7:23pm, Orjan Friberg wrote: > > > That is, I would like a solib that is now searched for in > > > solib-absolute-prefix to be searched for in solib-search-path instead. > > > Would it make sense to add such a command, like solib-ignore-path? (I'd > > > be happy to make it happen.) In effect, it would make all solibs to be > > > searched for in solib-search-path by file name only, and > > > solib-absolute-path would have no effect. > > > > Is this really necessary? I just put unstripped libraries in a > > directory named lib and set the absolute prefix appropriately. > > > > Other than that, we should fall back to solib-search-path and the > > basename if solib-absolute-path fails for us, IMO. Would that work for > > you? Set the absolute-path to /dev/null or so and then add the > > fallback code. > > FYI: I'm not twiddling my thumbs waiting for you or anybody else to > implement this for me. I'm willing to dig in and do it, but I'm > currently swamped in other things, and will probably be so for a few > more days. As they say, "It's on my TODO list." Good. Daniel's suggested approach to solving your problem sounds okay to me so a patch based on his suggestion should be okay too. Thanks, Kevin