> On Tue, Jan 07, 2003 at 10:10:36AM -0500, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> 
>> >>Thoughts?
> 
>> >
>> >
>> >The idea sounds good to me.
>> >
>> >Instead of ed'ing Gdb.log, how about just naming the first file
>> >Gdb.out or Gdb-raw.log, and then sed'ing into Gdb.log.
> 
>> 
>> I can save the unedited output.
>> 
>> To make sed worthwhile, I'd need to construct a sed script that did all 
>> substitutions in a single pass.  Otherwize the script ends up repeating:
>> 	sed -e ... < input > output
>> 	mv output input
>> which is equivalent to ed.  That, I think, is something for a rainy day.
> 
> 
> It's as simple as "sed -e ... -e ... -e ... -e ... < input > output",
> isn't it?  Or via -f and a file, the same thing.

Yes - `construct a sed script'.  I've done it (attached, committed). 
Doesn't make it any faster though.  The slow bit is:

+       func="`addr2line -f -e ./gdb/gdb -s ${addr} | sed -n -e 1p`"

enjoy,
Andrew