From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10128 invoked by alias); 7 Mar 2014 10:53:14 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 10117 invoked by uid 89); 7 Mar 2014 10:53:13 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_SOFTFAIL autolearn=no version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mtaout22.012.net.il Received: from mtaout22.012.net.il (HELO mtaout22.012.net.il) (80.179.55.172) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Fri, 07 Mar 2014 10:53:11 +0000 Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout22.012.net.il by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0N2200700BJAGG00@a-mtaout22.012.net.il> for gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Fri, 07 Mar 2014 12:53:08 +0200 (IST) Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([87.69.4.28]) by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0N220074KBKJ7CA0@a-mtaout22.012.net.il>; Fri, 07 Mar 2014 12:53:08 +0200 (IST) Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2014 10:53:00 -0000 From: Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] Error on bad count number In-reply-to: <5319938B.60402@codesourcery.com> To: Yao Qi Cc: palves@redhat.com, brobecker@adacore.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii Message-id: <8338iuqnzj.fsf@gnu.org> References: <1394023608-10761-1-git-send-email-yao@codesourcery.com> <1394023608-10761-3-git-send-email-yao@codesourcery.com> <20140305142939.GB16858@adacore.com> <531749BA.8050806@redhat.com> <5318456D.3010709@codesourcery.com> <53186842.9030704@redhat.com> <5319938B.60402@codesourcery.com> X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2014-03/txt/msg00181.txt.bz2 > Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2014 17:38:19 +0800 > From: Yao Qi > CC: Joel Brobecker , > > > (top-gdb) ignore -6 1 > > Will ignore next crossing of breakpoint -6. > > Shouldn't GDB emit an error on the negative input? Do we have any > case that negative is valid? AFAIR, breakpoints set by GDB for its own purposes are given negative numbers.