Re: MI solib notification

[Vladimir Prus <vladimir@codesourcery.com>]

On Thursday 12 February 2009 16:22:47 Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 12:12:52PM +0300, Vladimir Prus wrote:
> > Eclipse does use this, in particular consider this bit of code:
> > 
> > 	public boolean hasSharedLibChanged(SharedLibrary lib, MIShared miLib) {
> > 		return !miLib.getName().equals(lib.getFileName()) ||
> > 			!MIFormat.getBigInteger(miLib.getFrom()).equals(lib.getStartAddress())   ||
> > 		    !MIFormat.getBigInteger(miLib.getTo()).equals(lib.getEndAddress()) ||
> > 			miLib.isRead() != lib.areSymbolsLoaded();
> > 	}
> > 
> > Now, we know this is never going to happen in practice, when using GDB, and this is
> > GDB-specific code, so maybe we can drop addresses from the GDB output and then DSF
> > folks will make sure they don't use start/end addresses? 
> 
> I see.  This is code that parses the CLI output, right?  Let's do as
> you suggest: not generate the addresses in MI notifications, and make
> GDB responsible for detecting this change in the future.

OK.

> > Well, not necessary, due to this code in clear_solib:
> > 
> > 
> > 903       if (exec_bfd != NULL
> > 904           && bfd_get_flavour (exec_bfd) != bfd_target_aout_flavour)
> > 905         disable_breakpoints_in_shlibs ();
> > 
> > So, I think we'll only get additional chatter on a.out targets -- do we care?
> 
> == vs != ?  I think this runs everywhere except a.out.

Yes, this runs everywhere except a.out and marks all breakpoints in solibs
disabled, without printing any messages. *Then* we look over all solibs
and call observer, but since all breakpoints are already disabled,
breakpoint.c:disable_breakpoints_in_unloaded_shlib won't do anything,
and won't say anything either.

- Volodya