From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8301 invoked by alias); 6 Dec 2011 13:03:51 -0000 Received: (qmail 8290 invoked by uid 22791); 6 Dec 2011 13:03:49 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from fencepost.gnu.org (HELO fencepost.gnu.org) (140.186.70.10) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 06 Dec 2011 13:03:30 +0000 Received: from eliz by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RXugC-0005av-VR; Tue, 06 Dec 2011 08:03:28 -0500 Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2011 14:04:00 -0000 Message-Id: From: Eli Zaretskii To: Pedro Alves CC: hal9000ed2k@gmail.com, tromey@redhat.com, dje@google.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org, pmuldoon@redhat.com, brobecker@adacore.com, drow@false.org, jan.kratochvil@redhat.com In-reply-to: <201112061249.47758.pedro@codesourcery.com> (message from Pedro Alves on Tue, 6 Dec 2011 12:49:47 +0000) Subject: Re: [patch] GDB 7.2: new feature for "backtrace" that cuts path to file (remain filename) Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii References: <83fwgzbrp9.fsf@gnu.org> <201112061249.47758.pedro@codesourcery.com> 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: 2011-12/txt/msg00168.txt.bz2 > From: Pedro Alves > Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2011 12:49:47 +0000 > Cc: hal9000ed2k@gmail.com, > tromey@redhat.com, > dje@google.com, > gdb-patches@sourceware.org, > pmuldoon@redhat.com, > brobecker@adacore.com, > drow@false.org, > jan.kratochvil@redhat.com > > > if the command was > > > > gcc -c ... /foo/bar/baz.c > > > > then GDB will show "/foo/bar/baz.c", but if the compilation command > > was > > > > gcc -c ... baz.c > > > > then GDB will show "baz.c". > > > > > Is that correct? If so, calling this `full' is misleading, I think, > > If that is correct, than the default isn't "full", but > the proposed "no-compile-directory" ? No, it's `full', because the compile directory was "/foo/bar". > Or maybe your compiler didn't emit the comp_dir attribute in the > debug info. "My compiler" in this case identifies itself as gcc (Ubuntu 4.4.3-4ubuntu5) 4.4.3 I'd be surprised if this version omits comp_dir, but if someone tells me how to check that, I will. > I don't really know what is the current default, and I'm now > confused too. :-) Then I'm in good company ;-) > > unless we really change GDB to always show a full absolute file name > > there. If we don't want to change, I suggest to call it `normal' or > > maybe `default' (with explanation along the above lines). > > I don't think normal or default are good names Then maybe "as-recorded"? Meaning that this is how the compiler recorded the file name in the debug info?