From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29847 invoked by alias); 13 Nov 2007 20:09:25 -0000 Received: (qmail 29838 invoked by uid 22791); 13 Nov 2007 20:09:24 -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; Tue, 13 Nov 2007 20:09:21 +0000 Received: from kahikatea.snap.net.nz (107.31.255.123.static.snap.net.nz [123.255.31.107]) by viper.snap.net.nz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B8DD3DA2ED; Wed, 14 Nov 2007 09:09:14 +1300 (NZDT) Received: by kahikatea.snap.net.nz (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 438988FC6D; Wed, 14 Nov 2007 09:09:12 +1300 (NZDT) From: Nick Roberts MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <18234.1121.556841.49775@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 20:09:00 -0000 To: Vladimir Prus Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Multiple breakpoint locations In-Reply-To: References: <18233.63439.953202.586908@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> X-Mailer: VM 7.19 under Emacs 23.0.50.46 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: 2007-11/txt/msg00101.txt.bz2 > > (gdb) d 1.1 > > warning: bad breakpoint number at or near '1.1' > > Well, you can't really delete a location -- if breakpoint expression > corresponds to 20 addresses, that's the way it is -- you cannot delete > some of those addresses from the program ;-) It's not immediately obvious, at least to me, so I think this should be documented. Also I think error should be used for the message instead of warning as the requested task is not performed. The message could be more helpful too: (gdb) d 1.1 This breakpoint cannot be deleted on its own. > > 2) I can enable/disable 1 and this appears to enable/disable all the > > locations. > > Perhap this could be documented in the manual. > > Well yes. Patches welcome ;-) I don't want to detract from the fact that you have contributed a major patch but I think you should document your own changes. This is also a good idea because you understand the changes best. > > 3) I created this breakpoint by specifying the line but if I do: > > > > b foo() > > > > or any variant I can think of, I just get a pending breakpoint as GDB > > doesn't recognise the location. Can such locations be specified on the > > command line by name? > > Does > > b 'void foo()' > > work better? Yes, thanks. It seems strange to me that the return type needs to be specified. I thought with overloading, people talked about signature which is determined by the name and arguments but not the return type. -- Nick http://www.inet.net.nz/~nickrob