From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4875 invoked by alias); 15 Aug 2002 04:26:08 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 4868 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2002 04:26:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (24.112.240.27) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 15 Aug 2002 04:26:07 -0000 Received: from ges.redhat.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D3DB3CA9; Thu, 15 Aug 2002 00:26:05 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <3D5B2D5D.5060102@ges.redhat.com> Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2002 21:26:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:1.0.0) Gecko/20020810 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: jason-swarelist@molenda.com, gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: RFC gdb crashes on watchpoint that's no longer valid References: <20020813152124.A97909@molenda.com> <7263-Wed14Aug2002140112+0300-eliz@is.elta.co.il> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2002-08/txt/msg00155.txt.bz2 >> Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2002 15:21:24 -0700 >> From: Jason Molenda >> >> Do either of these approaches appeal to anyone? > > > My vote is for removing the watchpoint, but I think the message > should be more clear. For example: > > if (! gdb_parse_exp_1 (&s, innermost_block, 0, &(b->exp))) > { > warning ("Unable to reset watchpoint %d (some of " > "its variables don't exist); deleting", b->number); Mine is for: do the same as for breakpoints (unless that is also dump-core :-) Andrew