From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16974 invoked by alias); 6 May 2011 03:20:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 16962 invoked by uid 22791); 6 May 2011 03:20:18 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 06 May 2011 03:20:01 +0000 Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p463JdMV009017 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 5 May 2011 23:19:39 -0400 Received: from host1.jankratochvil.net (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p463JbfX000810 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 5 May 2011 23:19:39 -0400 Received: from host1.jankratochvil.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by host1.jankratochvil.net (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p463JbSm012320; Fri, 6 May 2011 05:19:37 +0200 Received: (from jkratoch@localhost) by host1.jankratochvil.net (8.14.4/8.14.4/Submit) id p463JaZA012313; Fri, 6 May 2011 05:19:36 +0200 Date: Fri, 06 May 2011 03:20:00 -0000 From: Jan Kratochvil To: Joel Brobecker Cc: Tom Tromey , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [RFC] canonical linespec and multiple breakpoints ... Message-ID: <20110506031935.GA17062@host1.jankratochvil.net> References: <20110505162855.GA2546@adacore.com> <20110505224016.GB2568@adacore.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110505224016.GB2568@adacore.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) 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: 2011-05/txt/msg00174.txt.bz2 On Fri, 06 May 2011 00:40:16 +0200, Joel Brobecker wrote: > I think that, in a case where we have matches in code with debug > info, we shouldn't even bother looking at code without debugging > info. I think that this would be reasonable. There should be other > ways for the user to break on those instances that don't have > debug info he that's really what he meant. You have commonly system libraries debug info installed and you debug some unpackaged application without debug info. You see there application function `next_line', you `break next_line' on it. Oops, the breakpoint is missed, it broke on libc static function `next_line' and not on the application function. Thanks, Jan