Re:

[Michael Snyder <msnyder@cygnus.com>]

Stan Shebs wrote:
> 
>    Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1998 13:41:37 +0200 (MET DST)
>    From: "Philippe De Muyter" <phdm@macqel.be>
> 
>    Am I the only one to have (sometimes) the problem of finding a non-executable
>    with the same name earlier in my path than the program I want to debug ?
> 
> Apparently. :-)  But seriously, I don't think this change is a good idea.
> While it would work fine for native Unix debugging, it will lose for
> just about everything else.  For both cross-Unix and embedded debugging
> you almost certainly want the programs *not* to be marked as executable,
> so that your current host doesn't try to execute them.
> 
> However, if you set things up so that this test is only made when
> using a Unix child_ops, this would be a useful addition.

I don't think I have ever had this problem.  Is it not the case
that GDB always looks in the "current working directory" first, 
and only then looks along your path?  (certainly I do not have
"current working directory" on my path!)

If the above is the case, then under what circumstances could 
you have this problem?  The only one that I can think of is if
you were trying to debug something that is NOT in your current
working directory, yet you did NOT give a path to the binary
that you wanted to debug.

In which case, I would have to ask, "why would you want to do that?"

Michael