From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11404 invoked by alias); 11 Sep 2003 19:20:47 -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 11384 invoked from network); 11 Sep 2003 19:20:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (207.219.125.105) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 11 Sep 2003 19:20:47 -0000 Received: from redhat.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D24F2B89; Thu, 11 Sep 2003 15:20:44 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <3F60CB0C.5060504@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 19:20:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20030820 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Joel Brobecker Cc: Jim Blandy , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFA] parse and eval breakpoint conditions with correct language References: <20030910015400.GS423@gnat.com> <20030911180920.GD945@gnat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2003-09/txt/msg00233.txt.bz2 > Groumf! Our nightly regression test showed a small regression > which does not appear on my machine. We have an all-Ada program which > defines a function named Func1, and here is what the test does: > > (gdb) break *Func1'Address > (gdb) run I've been wondering if this language stuff was going to interact badly with breakpoints. Anyway, is it possible to create an equivalent gcj test case since gcj is likely more accessable to developers? Andrew