From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16206 invoked by alias); 12 Jun 2009 16:51:51 -0000 Received: (qmail 16194 invoked by uid 22791); 12 Jun 2009 16:51:50 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from NaN.false.org (HELO nan.false.org) (208.75.86.248) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 12 Jun 2009 16:51:41 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 931A9108CD; Fri, 12 Jun 2009 16:51:39 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (209.195.188.212.nauticom.net [209.195.188.212]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E9DC108CC; Fri, 12 Jun 2009 16:51:39 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1MF9yX-0003NI-Nw; Fri, 12 Jun 2009 12:51:33 -0400 Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2009 16:51:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Doug Evans Cc: Paul Pluzhnikov , Vladimir Prus , tromey@redhat.com, gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Registering pretty-printers Message-ID: <20090612165133.GA12951@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Doug Evans , Paul Pluzhnikov , Vladimir Prus , tromey@redhat.com, gdb@sources.redhat.com References: <200906080310.58102.vladimir@codesourcery.com> <200906111229.04020.vladimir@codesourcery.com> <8ac60eac0906111014y67049cb9vb5048acf2939373b@mail.gmail.com> <20090612005149.GA4987@caradoc.them.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2008-05-11) 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: 2009-06/txt/msg00122.txt.bz2 On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 12:43:12PM -0400, Doug Evans wrote: > On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 8:51 PM, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > > In my opinion, anything that increases the size of the executable is a > > non-starter.  I don't think there's any reliable way to create a > > non-allocatable section, and it would have other problems, like > > duplicate elimination. > > Reliable in what sense? [I realize the term is pretty unambiguous. > I'm guessing I'm missing something as it doesn't seem to be > excessively hard for many important targets.] Or did you mean > portable? Poor choice of word. Same thing Vladimir was talking about, though, in essence. I don't want the only decent solution to be one that requires pushing new tools out. Fedora can do that; maybe Google can too, I don't know anything about your development environments. But plenty of other places can't. I think Vladimir's got a solid point - we need a way to just point the debugger at files and have them go. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery