From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 31970 invoked by alias); 5 May 2005 15:28:06 -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 31628 invoked from network); 5 May 2005 15:27:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 5 May 2005 15:27:57 -0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.50 #1 (Debian)) id 1DTiGV-0002w3-Is; Thu, 05 May 2005 11:27:51 -0400 Date: Thu, 05 May 2005 15:28:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Dennis Brueni , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFC] fullname attribute for GDB/MI stack frames Message-ID: <20050505152750.GA11235@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Dennis Brueni , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <20050505152537.GA31111@white> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050505152537.GA31111@white> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i X-SW-Source: 2005-05/txt/msg00162.txt.bz2 On Thu, May 05, 2005 at 11:25:37AM -0400, Bob Rossi wrote: > I personally think that at best, Eli's originally regex will need to be > used. For instance, I don't believe that GDB should change in order to > get the proper regex in this testcase. I believe that we should use a > regex that matches the current output of GDB. If it is determined that > GDB is broke, it can be fixed in another patch. I agree. I don't much care what the regular expression is; I'm just waiting for you to take care of that before I return to the initial patch. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery, LLC