From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14879 invoked by alias); 5 May 2006 13:51:30 -0000 Received: (qmail 14870 invoked by uid 22791); 5 May 2006 13:51:29 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from nevyn.them.org (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31.1) with ESMTP; Fri, 05 May 2006 13:51:27 +0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.54) id 1Fc0iK-000780-Nx; Fri, 05 May 2006 09:51:24 -0400 Date: Fri, 05 May 2006 13:51:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Vladimir Prus Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: -stack-list-frames HIGH_FRAME changes Message-ID: <20060505135124.GA27371@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Vladimir Prus , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-05/txt/msg00055.txt.bz2 On Fri, May 05, 2006 at 11:54:08AM +0400, Vladimir Prus wrote: > Hi, > attached patch stops -stack-list-frames from emitting error when the > HIGH_FRAME parameter is larger than the actual number of frames. As far as I'm concerned, this change is reasonable; but let's wait until next week to see if anyone else has a reason for the current behavior. (I don't think anyone will; just being cautious.) > ? .gdbinit Please trim all this next time :-) > Index: ChangeLog > =================================================================== > RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/ChangeLog,v > retrieving revision 1.7714 > diff -u -r1.7714 ChangeLog > --- ChangeLog 3 May 2006 22:59:38 -0000 1.7714 > +++ ChangeLog 5 May 2006 07:50:28 -0000 > @@ -1,3 +1,10 @@ It's usually better to include ChangeLog entries as text, not as diffs. When they're diffs, they invariably generate patch rejects later on. > +2006-05-05 Vladimir Prus > + > + * mi/mi-cmd-stack.c (mi_cmd_stack_list_frames): Don't emit error > + if high requested frame number is larger then number of available > + frames. > + > + Just one blank line between entries, please. > -are equal, it shows the single frame at the corresponding level. > +are equal, it shows the single frame at the corresponding level. It is > +an error if @var{low-frame} is larger than the actual number of frames. On > +the other hand, @var{high-frame} may be larger then the actual number of > +frames, in which case only existing frames will be returned. Two spaces after periods. (Eli, does TeX actually care about that, or is it just good for consistency?) > Index: testsuite/ChangeLog > =================================================================== > RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog,v > retrieving revision 1.1208 > diff -u -r1.1208 ChangeLog > --- testsuite/ChangeLog 1 May 2006 22:21:35 -0000 1.1208 > +++ testsuite/ChangeLog 5 May 2006 07:50:34 -0000 > @@ -1,3 +1,9 @@ > +2006-05-05 Vladimir Prus > + > + * gdb.mi/mi2-stack.exp (test_stack_frame_listing): Test that > + HIGH_FRAME argument to -stack-list-locals can be larger than > + the number of frames. Please don't add new tests to just mi2-stack.exp. I don't much care whether mi2-stack.exp is updated or not, but when we finalize mi3 and create mi3-* tests, they're going to be copied from mi-*. So it's important that new tests go there also. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery