From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 32416 invoked by alias); 18 Aug 2010 08:17:15 -0000 Received: (qmail 32401 invoked by uid 22791); 18 Aug 2010 08:17:12 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_50 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail.streamline-computing.com (HELO mail.streamline-computing.com) (217.32.220.20) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 18 Aug 2010 08:17:08 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.streamline-computing.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BA95BB42; Wed, 18 Aug 2010 09:17:05 +0100 (BST) Received: from mail.streamline-computing.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.streamline-computing.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sNPGUPB0Xmd0; Wed, 18 Aug 2010 09:17:05 +0100 (BST) Received: by mail.streamline-computing.com (Postfix, from userid 114) id 1679EBB44; Wed, 18 Aug 2010 09:17:05 +0100 (BST) Received: from [192.168.0.6] (cpc1-sotn6-0-0-cust372.15-1.cable.virginmedia.com [213.105.213.117]) (Authenticated sender: cjanuary) by mail.streamline-computing.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB326BB42; Wed, 18 Aug 2010 09:17:04 +0100 (BST) Subject: Re: [RFC] make gdb handle weak function better From: Chris January To: Daniel Jacobowitz Cc: Hui Zhu , gdb@sourceware.org In-Reply-To: <20100811203057.GA25122@caradoc.them.org> References: <1281513884.1935.7.camel@gumtree> <20100811203057.GA25122@caradoc.them.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2010 08:17:00 -0000 Message-ID: <1282119424.1953.1.camel@gumtree> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Copyrighted-Material: X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2010-08/txt/msg00114.txt.bz2 On Wed, 2010-08-11 at 16:31 -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > That makes sense, although it may be system-specific. Even better > would be to revisit our support for multiple-location breakpoints. > "break calloc" ought to stop on every instance of calloc. Aside from breakpoints you still need to know which 'calloc' the dynamic linker has bound in order to evaluate function calls, i.e. print calloc(100) ought to call the same 'calloc' as the inferior. Regards, Chris This e-mail message may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not an addressee or otherwise authorized to receive this message, you should not use, copy, disclose or take any action based on this e-mail or any information contained in the message. If you have received this material in error, please advise the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete this message. Thank you. Allinea Software Limited: Registered in England and Wales No: 6871298 Registered Address: The Innovation Centre, Warwick Technology Park, Gallows Hill, Warwick, CV34 6UW, United Kingdom