From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26793 invoked by alias); 17 Jun 2008 22:20:12 -0000 Received: (qmail 26781 invoked by uid 22791); 17 Jun 2008 22:20:11 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mailhost.u-strasbg.fr (HELO mailhost.u-strasbg.fr) (130.79.200.154) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Tue, 17 Jun 2008 22:19:37 +0000 Received: from baal.u-strasbg.fr (baal.u-strasbg.fr [IPv6:2001:660:2402::41]) by mailhost.u-strasbg.fr (8.14.2/jtpda-5.5pre1) with ESMTP id m5HMJXIs001186 ; Wed, 18 Jun 2008 00:19:33 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mailserver.u-strasbg.fr (ms1.u-strasbg.fr [IPv6:2001:660:2402::141]) by baal.u-strasbg.fr (8.14.0/jtpda-5.5pre1) with ESMTP id m5HMJXWw077598 ; Wed, 18 Jun 2008 00:19:33 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost (kassar.u-strasbg.fr [130.79.200.61]) by mailserver.u-strasbg.fr (8.13.8/jtpda-5.5pre1) with ESMTP id m5HMJXMh095857 ; Wed, 18 Jun 2008 00:19:33 +0200 (CEST) Received: from lec67-4-82-230-53-140.fbx.proxad.net (lec67-4-82-230-53-140.fbx.proxad.net [82.230.53.140]) by webmail.u-strasbg.fr (Horde MIME library) with HTTP; Wed, 18 Jun 2008 00:19:33 +0200 Message-ID: <20080618001933.tgxx233giok4gk4g@webmail.u-strasbg.fr> Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2008 01:43:00 -0000 From: Pierre Muller To: Christopher Faylor Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [RFA-v3] win32-nat.c: Add dll names if debugevents is on References: <000001c8cd57$c9cf3d30$5d6db790$@u-strasbg.fr> <000101c8cdaa$3717cc20$a5476460$@u-strasbg.fr> <20080615225330.GA7678@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> <200806160432.06714.pedro@codesourcery.com> <20080617042351.GA13112@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> In-Reply-To: <20080617042351.GA13112@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; DelSp="Yes"; format="flowed" Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable User-Agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) H3 (4.1.5) / FreeBSD-6.2 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (mailhost.u-strasbg.fr [IPv6:2001:660:2402::154]); Wed, 18 Jun 2008 00:19:33 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Status: Clean 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: 2008-06/txt/msg00327.txt.bz2 Christopher Faylor a =E9cri= t : > On Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 04:32:06AM +0100, Pedro Alves wrote: >> A Sunday 15 June 2008 23:53:30, Christopher Faylor wrote: >> >>> I guess my basic question here is why is this needed at all? Does >>> the non-windows version of gdb have something similar? If so, this >>> should be patterned after that. If not, why is Windows special? >> >> Well, with set "set verbose 1" you can see dll names being >> read in already, but you also get a lot more. This is just a >> couple of lines to add some debug output. Note that it >> can't be much patterned (without some extra hair) other than >> printing the so name, because the solib.c doesn't know a >> thing about each solib's struct lm_info implementation. Then >> again, I only suggested to add the image base to the output >> because it was handy... Anyway, I've already spent more time >> in this thread than it takes to add debug output locally >> every time I'd need it. It's in Pierre's court to argue. ;-) > > Ok. This is the kind of response I was looking for. > > I'd like to have as little special case stuff in gdb as possible. We > have been moving in that direction and that's good. > > "set debugevents" is a special case behavior for Windows gdb. I didn't > add it and I've wondered why it was necessary in the first place since I > don't recall ever feeling its lack on linux. > > However, I guess I'll approve the patch since I can see why it would be > useful to have this information and it doesn't seem like there is > anything else that could be pressed into service in gdb-proper. Christopher, you didn't reply to my answer to your first email in that thread, http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2008-06/msg00306.html and I am quite confused by your wording? Should I understand this as an approval? Or is it just because you did not see my reply? In that case, is it because I did not send to you? I always suppress your email from the recipients because of the use-the-mailinglist suffix, but maybe you only mean that we should never reply only personnally to you? Pierre Muller GDB pascal language maintainer