From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7097 invoked by alias); 25 Mar 2002 18:01:03 -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 7064 invoked from network); 25 Mar 2002 18:01:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dublin.ACT-Europe.FR) (212.157.227.154) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 25 Mar 2002 18:01:01 -0000 Received: from berlin.ACT-Europe.FR (berlin.int.act-europe.fr [10.10.0.169]) by dublin.ACT-Europe.FR (Postfix) with ESMTP id B64E2229EFA; Mon, 25 Mar 2002 19:00:59 +0100 (MET) Received: by berlin.ACT-Europe.FR (Postfix, from userid 507) id 35A4095F; Mon, 25 Mar 2002 19:00:59 +0100 (CET) Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2002 10:01:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Tom Tromey Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFC] gdb_realpath causes problems with GVD Message-ID: <20020325190058.A19779@act-europe.fr> References: <20020319171236.D6465@act-europe.fr> <87adt2ri93.fsf@creche.redhat.com> <20020321091144.A30346@act-europe.fr> <20020321124411.A3351@act-europe.fr> <87663mo5uh.fsf@creche.redhat.com> <20020325102204.A1974@act-europe.fr> <873cyoh6oa.fsf@creche.redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <873cyoh6oa.fsf@creche.redhat.com>; from tromey@redhat.com on Mon, Mar 25, 2002 at 10:57:09AM -0700 X-SW-Source: 2002-03/txt/msg00467.txt.bz2 > I don't understand. We both agree that the most common case is currently correctly handled by GDB. The cases I am concerned about are corner-cases, but they did happen, and I would like GDB to remain consistent: if it tells me about file bla.C, I expect it to know about bla.C later, even if I don't provide the path to this file. > If it doesn't affect the feature I care about, then it doesn't matter > to me. Good, because this is exactly what I was suggesting: make GDB consistent using the new xfullpath function, but at the same time not breaking your important feature by makin GDB lenient enough to accept the following syntaxes: 1/ break toto.c:1 2/ break //toto.c:1 3/ break //toto.C:1 where fullpath can be resolved but does not need to. - break toto.C:1 is still not accepted. > The feature in question is having a way to tell gdb unambiguously > which file a breakpoint should appear in. The current mechanism for > this is to use an absolute path. Well actually, I actually broke this feature if you follow links, that it is was still working using syntax 2 of the above, so to my defense I only broke half of this feature :-). Fortunately, with my latest change, GDB is now printing the "correct" file name, and all 3 syntaxes are accepted by GDB. You seem OK with that, but I'd like to have other people's opinion. BTW: I have the patch ready for submission. I need to work on a new testcase before I submit it, but the current testsuite already shows one extra PASS. I need to find a tool to analyze 2 logs that tell me what has changed... -- Joel