From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12582 invoked by alias); 6 Jan 2008 21:07:46 -0000 Received: (qmail 12574 invoked by uid 22791); 6 Jan 2008 21:07:46 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from smtp-out.google.com (HELO smtp-out.google.com) (216.239.45.13) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 21:07:29 +0000 Received: from zps37.corp.google.com (zps37.corp.google.com [172.25.146.37]) by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id m06L7Q7X011798 for ; Sun, 6 Jan 2008 13:07:26 -0800 Received: from wa-out-1112.google.com (wafk17.prod.google.com [10.114.187.17]) by zps37.corp.google.com with ESMTP id m06L7PhE029546 for ; Sun, 6 Jan 2008 13:07:26 -0800 Received: by wa-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id k17so12549853waf.3 for ; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 13:07:25 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.114.153.18 with SMTP id a18mr808096wae.82.1199653645428; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 13:07:25 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.115.107.7 with HTTP; Sun, 6 Jan 2008 13:07:25 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Sun, 06 Jan 2008 21:07:00 -0000 From: "Doug Evans" To: "Eli Zaretskii" Subject: Re: [patch] IS_ABSOLUTE_PATH to handle both DOS and POSIX path st yles Cc: drow@false.org, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, ARistovski@qnx.com, gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, RMansfield@qnx.com In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <2F6320727174C448A52CEB63D85D11F40A58@nova.ott.qnx.com> <20080106054030.GA10410@caradoc.them.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: 2008-01/txt/msg00102.txt.bz2 On Jan 6, 2008 12:17 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > How would this option work in practice? > > How about > > (gdb) set filename-style (dos|unix) > > ? Apologies. The question on how it would work in practice and the comment on being cumbersome weren't intended to be treated in isolation. > > If one ever wanted to set it to the non-default value it'd be > > rather cumbersome to have to set it and then reset it for one-off > > uses of "the other" path kind. > > No more cumbersome than any other similar option, like "set > demangle-style", for example. I haven't used demangle-style enough to know if the use-cases are similar. What would the option apply to? How would the user know when and when not to use it? One thing that occurs to me is what if I do "bash$ gdb /prog/with/other/path/format"? Will gdb need to know the format before the user gets a chance to specify the format? [Now we're not just adding an option but a command line parameter too.] Another thing that occurs to me is that I vaguely remember building libraries in one environment and then using the library in another. I could be mistaken, it's been awhile. Can one have a case where both path formats are in use simultaneously? I don't mean to belabor the issue. It's just that an option seems problematic at best. I could be wrong of course.