From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23551 invoked by alias); 18 Apr 2007 21:55:30 -0000 Received: (qmail 23541 invoked by uid 22791); 18 Apr 2007 21:55:30 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from viper.snap.net.nz (HELO viper.snap.net.nz) (202.37.101.8) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Wed, 18 Apr 2007 22:55:27 +0100 Received: from farnswood.snap.net.nz (226.62.255.123.dynamic.snap.net.nz [123.255.62.226]) by viper.snap.net.nz (Postfix) with ESMTP id D6ECB3D9F5E; Thu, 19 Apr 2007 09:55:23 +1200 (NZST) Received: by farnswood.snap.net.nz (Postfix, from userid 500) id 38260627ED; Wed, 18 Apr 2007 22:53:10 +0100 (BST) From: Nick Roberts MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <17958.37701.519285.425570@farnswood.snap.net.nz> Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2007 21:55:00 -0000 To: Daniel Jacobowitz Cc: Dodji Seketeli , GDB Discuss Subject: Re: question about -file-exec-and-symbols gdbmi command In-Reply-To: <20070418121137.GA19685@caradoc.them.org> References: <20070418111206.45c55d72@coin> <17957.60377.419260.20236@farnswood.snap.net.nz> <20070418121124.36ccd4fa@coin> <17957.62645.824183.252961@farnswood.snap.net.nz> <20070418105813.GA6857@caradoc.them.org> <17958.2099.694416.221119@farnswood.snap.net.nz> <20070418121137.GA19685@caradoc.them.org> X-Mailer: VM 7.19 under Emacs 22.0.97.5 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: 2007-04/txt/msg00120.txt.bz2 > > > It shouldn't happen automatically. For instance, one use of > > > -file-exec-and-symbols is to tell GDB that the file has been > > > recompiled. > > > > That's independent of the breakpoint issue, isn't it? > > Nope. The difference is that the front end has some knowledge of > "this is a new program" versus "this is the same program being > reloaded", because it issued the command in response to some user > stimulus. GDB has no way to know why the command was issued; in one > case deleting breakpoints is appropriate, in the other it is not. > > So if the front end wants breakpoints deleted, I think it's reasonable > for it to do so explicitly. In Emacs at least, GDB command can be entered through the GUD buffer, just like they are on the command line, so I don't see how it would know the user's purpose any more than GDB does. Anyway, I have no need of this functionality at the moment. I'll raise it again when, or if, I need it later -- Nick http://www.inet.net.nz/~nickrob