From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7609 invoked by alias); 3 Jul 2011 18:12:25 -0000 Received: (qmail 7601 invoked by uid 22791); 3 Jul 2011 18:12:25 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from NaN.false.org (HELO nan.false.org) (208.75.86.248) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sun, 03 Jul 2011 18:12:11 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64E0410E66; Sun, 3 Jul 2011 18:12:10 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (pool-74-98-226-33.pitbpa.fios.verizon.net [74.98.226.33]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0AD9710E37; Sun, 3 Jul 2011 18:12:09 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1QdR9N-0003jj-2C; Sun, 03 Jul 2011 14:12:09 -0400 Date: Sun, 03 Jul 2011 18:15:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Joel Brobecker Cc: Phil Muldoon , iam ahal , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [patch] GDB 7.2: new feature for "backtrace" that cuts path to file (remain filename) Message-ID: <20110703181209.GA14060@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Joel Brobecker , Phil Muldoon , iam ahal , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <20110627160029.GF20676@adacore.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110627160029.GF20676@adacore.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) 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: 2011-07/txt/msg00077.txt.bz2 On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 09:00:29AM -0700, Joel Brobecker wrote: > Yeah, I am wondering which way would be best. It seems like a Python > backtrace decorator would already work, or could be made to work. > But on the other hand, we can't ignore the fact that linking against > the Python library is not necessary easy. In particular, things seems > to work OK on Windows, but I noticed that GDB crashes when trying to > source a Python script. I haven't tried linking with Python on x64 > Windows yet. FYI, when you get this symptom, it probably means (used to mean?) that the Python library is linked to a different version of the MSVC runtime than GDB is. I think someone posted a patch to work around this issue by not passing a FILE* to Python. Then again, my memory's not so good... I thought it was you... :-) -- Daniel Jacobowitz