From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16970 invoked by alias); 1 Jun 2005 21:31:55 -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 16907 invoked by uid 22791); 1 Jun 2005 21:31:45 -0000 Received: from viper.snap.net.nz (HELO viper.snap.net.nz) (202.37.101.8) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Jun 2005 21:31:45 +0000 Received: from farnswood.snap.net.nz (p243-tnt1.snap.net.nz [202.124.110.243]) by viper.snap.net.nz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97C75538F2C; Thu, 2 Jun 2005 09:31:42 +1200 (NZST) Received: by farnswood.snap.net.nz (Postfix, from userid 501) id CFF0F62A99; Wed, 1 Jun 2005 22:32:31 +0100 (BST) From: Nick Roberts MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <17054.10607.109160.333076@farnswood.snap.net.nz> Date: Wed, 01 Jun 2005 21:31:00 -0000 To: Bob Rossi Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] Hooks still needed for annotations In-Reply-To: <20050601113004.GC15414@white> References: <17053.24737.153388.915345@farnswood.snap.net.nz> <20050601113004.GC15414@white> X-SW-Source: 2005-06/txt/msg00014.txt.bz2 > > Although the intention is to eventually remove annotations I don't think > > this stage has been reached yet and it makes little sense to remove a > > small number of calls. The patch below re-instates them. > > Nick, in order for you to guarentee that your Emacs is working properly, > you are going to have to update the breakpoints after every command the > user types. Even though I think adding the patch is a good idea, if you > don't update the breakpoints after every command, bugs like this will > make it so that some users do not get the updated breakpoints. I don't think the fact that these annotations are missing in released versions of GDB (6.2 and 6.3?) is a good reason not to have them in future releases. > For instance, make a small main program, add a breakpoint, and then > immediatly delete it. I doubt you will get the breakpoints-invalid > annotation. The problem is, even if you fix them, you still have to > check the breakpoints after every command unless you query GDB for it's > version number to see if the bug is fixed. I don't currently use breakpoints-invalid but I might wish to at one stage. I want to ensure that annotations aren't quietly removed by dismantling them bit by bit. Nick