From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12374 invoked by alias); 27 Feb 2013 19:53:07 -0000 Received: (qmail 12366 invoked by uid 22791); 27 Feb 2013 19:53:06 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,KHOP_SPAMHAUS_DROP,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS 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; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 19:52:58 +0000 Received: from int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.25]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r1RJquQi020357 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 27 Feb 2013 14:52:56 -0500 Received: from host2.jankratochvil.net (ovpn-116-19.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.116.19]) by int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r1RJqqIc019469 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 27 Feb 2013 14:52:55 -0500 Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2013 20:06:00 -0000 From: Jan Kratochvil To: Doug Evans Cc: gdb-patches Subject: Re: [patch+doc 1/2] filename-display: 1->4 options {inferior,libs}{,-sepdebug} Message-ID: <20130227195251.GA29891@host2.jankratochvil.net> References: <20130215202536.GA20435@host2.jankratochvil.net> <20130227185345.GA21375@host2.jankratochvil.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: 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: 2013-02/txt/msg00709.txt.bz2 On Wed, 27 Feb 2013 20:40:08 +0100, Doug Evans wrote: > 1) How common/useful would it be to distinguish shared libs of an app > I've just built and installed in some private dir (or maybe > /usr/local) from system shared libs? > IOW treating, e.g., files in $HOME/lib/mumble different from /usr/lib/mumble. > I'm not sure it's a useful distinction, just wondering. I was more considering shared libraries in $HOME/src/elfutils which are part of the project one is currently debugging. Absolute pathnames are excessive there, one knows the (elfutils) source tree (s)he is debugging. /usr/local/lib/mumble.so I cannot reliably distinguish from $HOME/lib/mumble so /usr/local/lib/mumble.so will not be handled too well by default. But /usr/local/lib/mumble.so will be handled the same way as it is so it is not a regression. > 2) How do you see {with,without}-separate-debuginfo being used in practice? > I'm just wondering if this choice is the core of the problem or > whether it's system vs non-system. The goal is to apply the [patch 2/2] so what "with-separate-debuginfo" is used as identification of system libraries and therefore print absolute source pathnames for them with GDB by default. > [I understand the reasoning behind the previous version of the patch, > it's a problem that I as a distro user would want solved. > with-separate-debuginfo is a good proxy for system files, it's just > not good enough for me. Sorry!] I still do not understand what solution would be good for you, what is your usecase? This patchset tries to fix the obviously wrong case - displaying relative source pathnames for system libraries of common distros. This patchset does not automatically fix some other /usr/local or $HOME cases as I have not found a safe auto-detection for them. You can use echo >>~/.gdbinit set filename-display absolute or echo >>$HOME/src/project/bin-gdb.gdb set filename-display absolute for such cases. Thanks, Jan