Re: [commit] Improved linker-debugger interface

[Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com>]

Joel> Also, I am wondering we really want a warning in this case -
Joel> I think this is going to make the average user think that there
Joel> is something wrong and therefore that needs to be fixed. What
Joel> do people think?

Sergio> The second thing is the warning.  It is issues by Gary's patch, and I
Sergio> agree that it could confuse users.  However, I think it is still a good
Sergio> thing to have.  Maybe one could create a debug flag that would enable
Sergio> printing such warnings?  Just an idea.

It seems to me that we could make the warning more verbose and have it
request that users file a bug report; and it could include a little
explanation, plus some text to report.  Like:

    warning: Probes-based dynamic linker interface failed:
      Unknown numeric token ...
    This means there is a bug, either in gdb or elsewhere in the
    toolchain.  Please report it to the gdb bugzilla, along with
    this information:
      Arch: Whatever
      Probe name: ...
      Argument number: ...
      Argument text: ...

Being extra wordy is a bit of a pain, maybe, since presumably users will
see it often.  OTOH, it's a "shouldn't happen" scenario where gdb has
lots of information already...

Also, I wonder why we're trying to use the probes on a platform to which
the gdb side hasn't been ported.  Are we just optimistically trying to
parse the assembly operands here?

Tom