From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28137 invoked by alias); 18 Sep 2012 18:18:58 -0000 Received: (qmail 28127 invoked by uid 22791); 18 Sep 2012 18:18:55 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_NO X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 18 Sep 2012 18:18:43 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 558131C795C; Tue, 18 Sep 2012 14:18:43 -0400 (EDT) Received: from rock.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rock.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id YspbUFnJNDRX; Tue, 18 Sep 2012 14:18:43 -0400 (EDT) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23EE31C7598; Tue, 18 Sep 2012 14:18:43 -0400 (EDT) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 9673DCAE07; Tue, 18 Sep 2012 11:18:39 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2012 18:18:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Tom Tromey Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [RFA] wrong language used when re-setting breakpoint Message-ID: <20120918181839.GF3276@adacore.com> References: <1347928803-15526-1-git-send-email-brobecker@adacore.com> <87k3vrxu2o.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <20120918150542.GD3276@adacore.com> <878vc7xlxu.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <878vc7xlxu.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) 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: 2012-09/txt/msg00371.txt.bz2 > I was going to look into the issue, but I reverted the linespec.c change > locally but bp_reset.exp still passes. I do have a valid > debug-file-directory. Is there something else I need to do to see the > failure? I think it's very sensitive to which modules you have in your debug-file-directory. The machine on which I reproduced the testcase has a ton of stuff in there, and I didn't spend the time to figure out which one it is that causes the problem. That being said, when doing the same, I discovered that the testcase indeed passes without my patch. I did the investigation and patching using an older version of GDB, and simply merged it when it came to submitting it. I didn't think of running the testcase without my patch with the HEAD! A recent change must have disturbed a little the balance. I'll try looking into it a little deeper. Do you think I should revert my patch? -- Joel