From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5456 invoked by alias); 17 Nov 2005 19:27:13 -0000 Received: (qmail 5444 invoked by uid 22791); 17 Nov 2005 19:27:09 -0000 Received: from nitzan.inter.net.il (HELO nitzan.inter.net.il) (192.114.186.20) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with ESMTP; Thu, 17 Nov 2005 19:27:09 +0000 Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 (IGLD-80-230-21-94.inter.net.il [80.230.21.94]) by nitzan.inter.net.il (MOS 3.6.5-GR) with ESMTP id BYW03465 (AUTH halo1); Thu, 17 Nov 2005 21:27:04 +0200 (IST) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 19:42:00 -0000 Message-Id: From: Eli Zaretskii To: Andrew STUBBS CC: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com In-reply-to: <437C6D69.1030209@st.com> (message from Andrew STUBBS on Thu, 17 Nov 2005 11:45:45 +0000) Subject: Re: [PATCH] Use search path for scripts Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii References: <437B6718.7070300@st.com> <437C6D69.1030209@st.com> Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2005-11/txt/msg00296.txt.bz2 > Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 11:45:45 +0000 > From: Andrew STUBBS > Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com > > If the current directory was searched first then a users own scripts may > accidentally (and silently) override the intended script causing a > support headache. > > In short, the chosen strategy ensures that our product always works as > our customers expect. Sorry, I don't think that the peculiar setup on your systems is a reason good enough to change the current behavior in an incompatible fashion. Your specific problem could have been solved in a different way, for example by having all your system-wide scripts begin with a reserved string (you could make that string include some unusual characters to minimize the possibility of a name clash with user scripts). > In addition, this way round you can always specify which file you mean > by adding './' whereas the other way round requires a lot more typing to > say what you mean when it doesn't do what you expect. That could very well be so, but what you see as a disadvantage is what happens today. No doubt users are used to that extra typing when they need it (which I suppose happens fairly rarely in most debugging setups).