From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-89050-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 426 invoked by alias); 18 Mar 2012 20:46:28 -0000
Received: (qmail 418 invoked by uid 22791); 18 Mar 2012 20:46:27 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.3 required=5.0	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_SOFTFAIL,TW_SM
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from mtaout23.012.net.il (HELO mtaout23.012.net.il) (80.179.55.175)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sun, 18 Mar 2012 20:46:12 +0000
Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout23.012.net.il by a-mtaout23.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0M1300A00LOFQ800@a-mtaout23.012.net.il> for gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Sun, 18 Mar 2012 22:46:10 +0200 (IST)
Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([84.228.91.104]) by a-mtaout23.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0M1300A65LOUM180@a-mtaout23.012.net.il>; Sun, 18 Mar 2012 22:46:10 +0200 (IST)
Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2012 20:46:00 -0000
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [patch] GDB 7.2: new feature for "backtrace" that cuts path to file (remain filename)
In-reply-to: <CAA18ubJ0X4_VS0UjJ2DGx3zMd7ynMw_dg3Eti99O+X4+3dF6hQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: iam ahal <hal9000ed2k@gmail.com>
Cc: tromey@redhat.com, jan.kratochvil@redhat.com, palves@redhat.com, dje@google.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org, pmuldoon@redhat.com, brobecker@adacore.com, drow@false.org, asmwarrior@gmail.com
Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Message-id: <831uop3aen.fsf@gnu.org>
References: <BANLkTinD+9_Mkug8o2VhZ03L6XSriL_RKQ@mail.gmail.com> <83fwgzbrp9.fsf@gnu.org> <E1RXQvX-00045Q-Hk@fencepost.gnu.org> <201112061249.47758.pedro@codesourcery.com> <E1RXugC-0005av-VR@fencepost.gnu.org> <m3obvll9hr.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <E1RYCLT-0000ap-OY@fencepost.gnu.org> <CAA18ub+S+5Tw4D8X=c4=J995Gc7goS_Bm4MfuYqV8BWndoTmrQ@mail.gmail.com> <20120315224504.GA24829@host2.jankratochvil.net> <CAA18ubJ0X4_VS0UjJ2DGx3zMd7ynMw_dg3Eti99O+X4+3dF6hQ@mail.gmail.com>
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb-patches.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2012-03/txt/msg00672.txt.bz2

> Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2012 21:30:17 +0300
> From: iam ahal <hal9000ed2k@gmail.com>
> Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>, Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com>, palves@redhat.com, 
> 	dje@google.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org, pmuldoon@redhat.com, 
> 	brobecker@adacore.com, drow@false.org, asmwarrior <asmwarrior@gmail.com>
> 
> Here is an example of working with "relative filename" option:
> 
> $ gcc -Wall -g ~/Downloads/contrib/prog.c
> $ ./gdb-7.4/gdb/gdb ./a.out
> 
> (gdb) backtrace
> #0  main () at /home/unknown/Downloads/contrib/prog.c:3
> (gdb) set backtrace filename-display relative
> (gdb) backtrace
> #0  main () at prog.c:3
> 
> As I remember the difference between "basename" and "relative" option
> was explained some time ago in this thread.

Well, the difference between them is what I need.  Could you please
point to the message where that was explained?

> +If backtraces isn't easy to read due to a long absolute filename record and
                 ^^^^^
"aren't"

Thanks.