From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4421 invoked by alias); 15 Apr 2010 18:53:17 -0000 Received: (qmail 4392 invoked by uid 22791); 15 Apr 2010 18:53:15 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail.codesourcery.com (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (38.113.113.100) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 15 Apr 2010 18:53:09 +0000 Received: (qmail 31135 invoked from network); 15 Apr 2010 18:53:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO orlando.localnet) (pedro@127.0.0.2) by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 15 Apr 2010 18:53:07 -0000 From: Pedro Alves To: Michael Snyder Subject: Re: PR8554: New command to save breakpoints to a file Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 18:53:00 -0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.12.2 (Linux/2.6.31-20-generic; KDE/4.3.2; x86_64; ; ) Cc: "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" , "tromey@redhat.com" References: <201004090341.14389.pedro@codesourcery.com> <201004151927.05612.pedro@codesourcery.com> <4BC75EF7.7020208@vmware.com> In-Reply-To: <4BC75EF7.7020208@vmware.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201004151953.05613.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: 2010-04/txt/msg00475.txt.bz2 On Thursday 15 April 2010 19:46:15, Michael Snyder wrote: > Pedro Alves wrote: > > On Thursday 15 April 2010 18:51:55, Michael Snyder wrote: > >> What about watchpoints? Do we get all the context info right? > > > > Watchpoints on globals, as right as breakpoints. Watchpoints on > > locals, no, you're just out of luck. I don't think there's > > much to do there; GDB gets rid of those on process start/exit, > > so users are used to those not being very "persistanteable". > > OTOH, it may be useful to be able to dump watchpoints on locals, > > and be able to load them up when you know it's okay, so never > > dumping those isn't that great either. So, IMO, we shouldn't > > worry much about those, at least, in this first patch. :-) I > > could add a note to the manual, perhaps. > > That's cool. So what do we do now? Just skip them? > Save the global ones, skip the local ones? We save them. -- Pedro Alves