From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 707 invoked by alias); 3 Jun 2004 02:35:23 -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 700 invoked from network); 3 Jun 2004 02:35:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lakermmtao02.cox.net) (68.230.240.37) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 3 Jun 2004 02:35:23 -0000 Received: from white ([68.9.64.121]) by lakermmtao02.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.03.02 201-2131-111-104-20040324) with ESMTP id <20040603023521.KPOQ19971.lakermmtao02.cox.net@white>; Wed, 2 Jun 2004 22:35:21 -0400 Received: from bob by white with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1BVi4g-00015Y-00; Wed, 02 Jun 2004 22:35:22 -0400 Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2004 02:35:00 -0000 From: Bob Rossi To: Elena Zannoni Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: -file-list-exec-source-files Message-ID: <20040603023521.GA4096@white> Mail-Followup-To: Elena Zannoni , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <20040412150620.GA9464@white> <20040420141001.GB4465@white> <16519.59247.93650.941260@localhost.redhat.com> <20040426130529.GA11975@white> <20040506221258.GA7008@white> <20040522015250.GA26435@white> <16572.43047.435129.31640@localhost.redhat.com> <20040601180111.GA2685@white> <16574.9940.867059.792145@localhost.redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <16574.9940.867059.792145@localhost.redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i X-SW-Source: 2004-06/txt/msg00038.txt.bz2 On Wed, Jun 02, 2004 at 03:13:24PM -0400, Elena Zannoni wrote: > Bob Rossi writes: > > > > The dwarf2 specs say that the name is in the form ":pathname" or > > "hostname:pathname". Should we worry about the hostname? Does gcc emit > > that? I have looked at a few executables and didn't see the hostname > > part. > > > > Would you like me to try to take into account the > > hostname:dirname? Is the hostname allowed to have a ':' in it? > > > > Oh, no. Just the formatting. Ok, I'll commit it as soon as I get the chance. Thanks, Bob Rossi