From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19307 invoked by alias); 2 Jul 2011 06:15:34 -0000 Received: (qmail 19299 invoked by uid 22791); 2 Jul 2011 06:15:33 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_SOFTFAIL X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mtaout22.012.net.il (HELO mtaout22.012.net.il) (80.179.55.172) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sat, 02 Jul 2011 06:15:15 +0000 Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout22.012.net.il by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0LNO00900ZX2VV00@a-mtaout22.012.net.il> for gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Sat, 02 Jul 2011 09:15:11 +0300 (IDT) Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([84.228.8.216]) by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0LNP0099C017FKQ0@a-mtaout22.012.net.il>; Sat, 02 Jul 2011 09:15:11 +0300 (IDT) Date: Sat, 02 Jul 2011 06:15:00 -0000 From: Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: [RFC] canonical linespec and multiple breakpoints ... In-reply-to: To: Tom Tromey Cc: brobecker@adacore.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii Message-id: <83hb75qkcv.fsf@gnu.org> References: <20110505162855.GA2546@adacore.com> <83bozgmhil.fsf@gnu.org> <83k4dcd1bh.fsf@gnu.org> X-IsSubscribed: yes 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 X-SW-Source: 2011-07/txt/msg00063.txt.bz2 > From: Tom Tromey > Cc: brobecker@adacore.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org > Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2011 15:00:02 -0600 > > Eli> Maybe a useful interim step would be reworking the description you > Eli> posted into a concise list of broad use case classes and issues that > Eli> need to be solved in each class. We can then brainstorm possible > Eli> solutions against that list. > > Here are the various scenarios in a more CLI-centric way. Thanks. > 2. The same, but with a file:line. You mean, there's more than 1 file with the same basename? "The same" is slightly ambiguous here.