From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3319 invoked by alias); 8 Jul 2009 15:57:49 -0000 Received: (qmail 3310 invoked by uid 22791); 8 Jul 2009 15:57:48 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail.codesourcery.com (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (65.74.133.4) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 08 Jul 2009 15:57:38 +0000 Received: (qmail 18915 invoked from network); 8 Jul 2009 15:57:36 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO orlando) (pedro@127.0.0.2) by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 8 Jul 2009 15:57:36 -0000 From: Pedro Alves To: danny.backx@scarlet.be Subject: Re: How to fix solib path name? Date: Wed, 08 Jul 2009 16:19:00 -0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.10 Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <1247063678.3870.59.camel@pavilion> <1247067073.3870.69.camel@pavilion> <1247067931.3870.76.camel@pavilion> In-Reply-To: <1247067931.3870.76.camel@pavilion> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200907081657.38489.pedro@codesourcery.com> X-IsSubscribed: yes 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: 2009-07/txt/msg00261.txt.bz2 On Wednesday 08 July 2009 16:45:31, Danny Backx wrote: > On Wed, 2009-07-08 at 17:31 +0200, Danny Backx wrote: > > On Wed, 2009-07-08 at 16:07 +0100, Pedro Alves wrote: > > > Maybe we can make gdbserver smarter even on CE < 6? I think I > > > remember that if you had toolhelp.dll on the device, you'd get > > > absolute paths, but I'm not sure if that's a valid memory I have. > > > > > > > I've added one printf statement to gdbserver/server.c just after where > > it assembles the library name list. > > > > Output on the infamous C++ hello2.exe below. Two out of the three are > > absolute path names. Not sure why the other one isn't. > > > > Is it best to adapt gdbserver for this ? > > If the answer to my question is yes, then it's not a hard fix. It's > attached. No, that's the wrong direction. Absolute paths are better. I'd rather we make a better effort at finding the pathname in the cases we don't know them. Losing information like this is never good. At most, we could add a knob to gdb to ignore the path information and look at the filename only. But, please, let's not go around and around, when I suggested "set sysroot" several times already. Did you actually try that? Please do, before posting more patches. -- Pedro Alves