From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20740 invoked by alias); 4 Jun 2006 02:50:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 20713 invoked by uid 22791); 4 Jun 2006 02:50:43 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from nevyn.them.org (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31.1) with ESMTP; Sun, 04 Jun 2006 02:50:22 +0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.54) id 1Fmigy-0001jv-1c; Sat, 03 Jun 2006 22:50:16 -0400 Date: Sun, 04 Jun 2006 02:50:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Nick Roberts Cc: Eli Zaretskii , susan@smacchia.net, jimb@codesourcery.com, gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: MI: -file-list-exec-source-files Message-ID: <20060604025016.GA6667@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Nick Roberts , Eli Zaretskii , susan@smacchia.net, jimb@codesourcery.com, gdb@sourceware.org References: <20060603004553.33821.qmail@web51812.mail.yahoo.com> <17536.58772.420434.491191@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> <17538.3165.636175.483701@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> <20060603223537.GA3482@nevyn.them.org> <17538.9045.370853.784139@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <17538.9045.370853.784139@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11+cvs20060403 X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-06/txt/msg00017.txt.bz2 On Sun, Jun 04, 2006 at 12:03:33PM +1200, Nick Roberts wrote: > > > > Sounds like we should implement duplicate removal from the UI lists? > > > > > > I'm not sure. It may take GDB longer to remove the duplicate entries than > > > it does for Emacs to read them. It would be best not to create them in the > > > first place, but maybe that's not easily done. > > > > There are two potential sources of duplication: bugs, e.g. in our > > processing of symbol vs. line information, and actual duplicate entries > > in the debug info. As Susan correctly noted, the duplicates are often > > legitimate and discarding them entirely would be bad. > > OK, I didn't realise that. How do we distinguish between these and those > which aren't needed? Will the legitimate ones always have a non-NULL dirname Let me try being more explicit about this, since I think I'm not communicating :-) It sounds like a bug, or at least sub-optimal behavior, in the dwarf reader. Someone should figure out why it happens, and how to stop it. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery