From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20166 invoked by alias); 19 Mar 2002 19:18:12 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 20025 invoked from network); 19 Mar 2002 19:17:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO odin.inter.net.il) (192.114.186.10) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 19 Mar 2002 19:17:53 -0000 Received: from zaretsky (diup-219-202.inter.net.il [213.8.219.202]) by odin.inter.net.il (Mirapoint) with ESMTP id AHK06937; Tue, 19 Mar 2002 21:17:41 +0200 (IST) Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 11:18:00 -0000 From: "Eli Zaretskii" To: drow@mvista.com Message-Id: <3405-Tue19Mar2002211430+0200-eliz@is.elta.co.il> X-Mailer: emacs 21.2.50 (via feedmail 8 I) and Blat ver 1.8.9 CC: brobecker@ACT-Europe.FR, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com In-reply-to: <20020319123357.A16236@nevyn.them.org> (message from Daniel Jacobowitz on Tue, 19 Mar 2002 12:33:57 -0500) Subject: Re: [RFC] gdb_realpath causes problems with GVD Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii References: <20020319171236.D6465@act-europe.fr> <20020319123357.A16236@nevyn.them.org> X-SW-Source: 2002-03/txt/msg00358.txt.bz2 > Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 12:33:57 -0500 > From: Daniel Jacobowitz > > > Is this a complete solution? That is, will it work in a situation > > slightly different from your, e.g., when one of the directories in the > > full file name is also a symlink? > > I believe it will. We'll have a canonical name for each directory a > source file was built out of; if the source file was a link, well, it's > still the name we were given for the source file. Does that seem right > to you? I'm not sure yet. My doubt stems from the fact that directories are also recorded in the debug info, at least with some formats (stabs, DWARF2). One place in GDB where we use this is in file-name completion, for example when you type "break /foo TAB" and want GDB to complete this to "break /foobar/foo.c" (assuming that there's only one file foo.c in that directory that was compiled into the program). Will this break if symlinks are followed in the directory part, but not in the file-name part?