From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3319 invoked by alias); 4 Oct 2012 14:25:18 -0000 Received: (qmail 3288 invoked by uid 22791); 4 Oct 2012 14:25:15 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,KHOP_RCVD_TRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_YE,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,TW_XG X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail-vc0-f169.google.com (HELO mail-vc0-f169.google.com) (209.85.220.169) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 04 Oct 2012 14:25:11 +0000 Received: by mail-vc0-f169.google.com with SMTP id fl17so760454vcb.0 for ; Thu, 04 Oct 2012 07:25:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:x-system-of-record:x-gm-message-state; bh=/8Z2PHGnn3jMzEfbizqGh3O5ZzuX1LxeX+g6J/3tU/4=; b=KW2LgtS9zfeAoPmqkQCA1EGZgeLf6lXBrxeRfFAyKifgT86A+cv6c2jsx5XNc4n2Iq 9K9Z90RwhVopd9rJF/lw2QyQ/Yp2odXuRCOHEitrcMn/9E8Sk0BE2AkSoByGBTPwg0fs y0bT1JF2Q1iX26kPyPSnaEcS74SYMr6nH7On+4p/Fj689gnQNBY9Lw8sE8I8MLk6NKFO +ZNCopWosp/ZuWRN9aL4adZBvSD+MBXSFbl1a0Mj9qZ5iuTosVt3taeMECb4hKGXzn6E ptNWbO1A8QIkuQAmy3NcEEBkK/xZ1nHaTAEYOuRrf+t/9IosIpc2+wsPT9oC7+DcjN4w XeCQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.58.4.193 with SMTP id m1mr3407843vem.44.1349360710578; Thu, 04 Oct 2012 07:25:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.52.24.239 with HTTP; Thu, 4 Oct 2012 07:25:10 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20121004013358.GJ3028@adacore.com> References: <2878953E-B698-43F3-989A-A551D96BAB62@cs.umd.edu> <20120924152641.GF4146@adacore.com> <9F52A338-A158-44DC-90C1-F46503859613@cs.umd.edu> <285502C6-1395-4049-9D55-031EDA3AD06D@cs.umd.edu> <20120924170348.GI4146@adacore.com> <20120927091737.GB2980@adacore.com> <20121004000840.GI3028@adacore.com> <20121004013358.GJ3028@adacore.com> Date: Thu, 04 Oct 2012 14:25:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] Also install data-directory into the build directory as computed by relocate_gdb_directory From: Doug Evans To: Joel Brobecker Cc: Khoo Yit Phang , Jan Kratochvil , GDB Patches Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-System-Of-Record: true X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQltQLHzxgv1rkVpbsJRhDsYE5cTbV3himfOlY3c5hB7cI4wXQEjI/WnkMBbp8z6w1FnUTae5hx17PGpI2uVJA2oJUdg8kNpcEI3X5+5tb27gYs/QaOQbUyMjLzH0KbzwPYF542eFOuIAZecsaGPbQy6BgeYJH82acSf6Iz656gK8gDqefRvBoRbKiboO+rvos0CORL89XD4rq9i/lljpAYO6bn3XQ== 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: 2012-10/txt/msg00074.txt.bz2 On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 6:33 PM, Joel Brobecker wrote: >> I think(!) this "can't happen" (if I understand the patch correctly), >> the installed directory will always be a subdir of $(top_builddir)/.. >> It may be a useless subdirectory of $(top_builddir)/.., but at least >> it's in the build tree. :-) >> [Again, assuming I understand the patch correctly.] > > You might be right - I might have missed that. But the patch cannot > be applied as is, as it relies on a GNU Make feature. So we were > going to adapt it to use sed instead. Yeah, I saw the GNU Make usage. However, that's just an implementation detail, using sed will have the same result (right?). >> Another wild idea is to rename the gdb in the build directory as xgdb >> (akin to xgcc). One could key off that to know gdb is being run from >> the build directory. > > I think that this is opening the door for allowing GDB to execute > code without the user being aware of it. I'd rather avoid that. How so? >> btw, Is there a use-case of yours that I'm missing? > > I do not think so. It's mostly a case where I build and then test > right away using the binary in the build directory. I've been doing > that for the past 12 years, and I find it saves time, Ditto. > albeit only > a little. I was exploring the idea of trying to preserve this > behavior. But I think the cost might be exceeding the benefits. I too don't want to give up on this yet. > Thanks for looking into this with us, though. This is not to say > that the discussion is over; just that, so far, the options suggested > don't really help enough to be worth implementing (IMO). > > -- > Joel