From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Fernando Nasser To: Elena Zannoni Cc: Fernando Nasser , david@llamedos.org, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] Stale FIXME Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2001 15:02:00 -0000 Message-id: <3B1EA7C9.9E2A4230@redhat.com> References: <20010522031008.A30509@llamedos.org> <3B0C4192.1C68898C@cygnus.com> <15134.42137.106652.218525@kwikemart.cygnus.com> X-SW-Source: 2001-06/msg00099.html Elena Zannoni wrote: > > Fernando Nasser writes: > > David Deephanphongs wrote: > > > > > > There appears to be a stale FIXME in main.c - it warns about the > > > argument after the program-name (corearg): > > > /* FIXME: The documentation says this can be a "ProcID". as well. */ > > > > > > GDB /does/ treat the corearg as a PID, though. > > > First it tries to open corearg as a core-file. If that fails, it attempts > > > to use it as a PID (main.c:615-623). > > > > Yes, and I use it all the time to debug gdb with gdb. That was a badly worded FIXME text. It was supposed to say that we should not be overloading variables and filling them with something that is not related to its name -- 4 bytes is a small price to pay for clarity IMO. > > > > I still would like to keep a note there that saying that corearg may be a PID and not a core file name. Something like: > > > > /* COREARG can be the name of a core file or > > the "ProcID" of a process we should attach to. */ > > > > Can you submit your patch with the replacement text? I will ask permission to Elena and check it in. > > > > I see, you added the comment... :-) So I trust you know what you meant > to say. Please, modify the comment as you indicated above. > > Thanks > Elena > Thank you Elena. There is also a patch from David Deephanphongs that proposes creating a new variable in this same thread. -- Fernando Nasser Red Hat Canada Ltd. E-Mail: fnasser@redhat.com 2323 Yonge Street, Suite #300 Toronto, Ontario M4P 2C9