From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9757 invoked by alias); 24 Jan 2007 23:14:24 -0000 Received: (qmail 9741 invoked by uid 22791); 24 Jan 2007 23:14:22 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from viper.snap.net.nz (HELO viper.snap.net.nz) (202.37.101.8) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Wed, 24 Jan 2007 23:14:11 +0000 Received: from kahikatea.snap.net.nz (126.60.255.123.dynamic.snap.net.nz [123.255.60.126]) by viper.snap.net.nz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A7FE3D8342; Thu, 25 Jan 2007 12:14:04 +1300 (NZDT) Received: by kahikatea.snap.net.nz (Postfix, from userid 500) id 422734F720; Thu, 25 Jan 2007 12:14:01 +1300 (NZDT) From: Nick Roberts MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <17847.59449.255655.56503@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2007 23:14:00 -0000 To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Fr=E9d=E9ric?= Riss Cc: Denis PILAT , Vladimir Prus , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFC] varobj deletion after the binary has changed In-Reply-To: <1169679148.5160.34.camel@funkylaptop> References: <45B60056.6030704@st.com> <20070123124457.GA1600@nevyn.them.org> <45B61B41.90509@st.com> <17847.54349.654238.452957@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> <1169676493.5160.14.camel@funkylaptop> <17847.56114.220249.307621@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> <1169679148.5160.34.camel@funkylaptop> X-Mailer: VM 7.19 under Emacs 22.0.93.1 X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2007-01/txt/msg00515.txt.bz2 > You might be true. I mentioned that because it's easy to check and there > seems to be no matching patch description in your spec file. Anyway > fixing that seems simple enough that we don't need to dig through 80 > RedHat patches to come up with a patch. It's not simple for me as I'm not familiar with that part (symbol tables) of the code yet. > AFAIK Denis's working on a version re-evealuating (actually re-parsing) > varobjs with no attached blocks and putting the others in some error > state that'll return in_scope="false" at the next update. Does that seem > reasonable? In FC5 GDB there doesn't seem to be a problem with varobjs with no attached blocks i.e global variables, and those which do have attached blocks i.e locals do currently return in_scope="false", on GNU/Linux at least (maybe it has something to do with randomisation though). Like Dennis, I think there should be some provision for deleting the latter on restarting. With watchpoints this happens automatically. -- Nick http://www.inet.net.nz/~nickrob