From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-return-17140-listarch-gdb=sources.redhat.com@sources.redhat.com>
Received: (qmail 10478 invoked by alias); 10 Feb 2004 21:22:43 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-subscribe@sources.redhat.com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb@sources.redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-help@sources.redhat.com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com
Received: (qmail 10470 invoked from network); 10 Feb 2004 21:22:42 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (216.129.200.20)
  by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 10 Feb 2004 21:22:42 -0000
Received: from gnu.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id EE1FB2B92; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 16:22:41 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <40294BA1.3020906@gnu.org>
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 21:22:00 -0000
From: Andrew Cagney <cagney@gnu.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20030820
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com>
Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: Pending breakpoints and scripts
References: <4027E74B.6090805@gnu.org> <20040209223227.GA7344@nevyn.them.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SW-Source: 2004-02/txt/msg00092.txt.bz2

> On Mon, Feb 09, 2004 at 03:02:19PM -0500, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> 
>> Anyone noticed this?
>> 
>> (top-gdb) run testsuite/gdb.base/advance
>> Starting program: ...
>> Setting up the environment for debugging gdb.
>> Function "internal_error" not defined.
>> Breakpoint 1 (internal_error) pending.
>> Function "info_command" not defined.
>> Breakpoint 2 (info_command) pending.
>> (top-gdb)
>> 
>> It's caused by this:
>> 
>>           if (!query ("Make breakpoint pending on future shared library 
>> load? ")
>> )
>>             return rc;
>> 
>> The old behavior was: when in batch mode, throw an error (and hence 
>> abandon the script) if the breakpoint insert fails.
>> 
>> The new behavior is: when in batch mode, always insert the breakpoint. 
>> when not in batch mode never throw an error.
>> 
>> For the existing behavior to be restored the query's logic would need to 
>> be reversed (ask the oposite question) and then re-throw the error.  A 
>> /pending qualifier could then be added.
>> 
>> Thoughts?
> 
> 
> I'd rather not reverse the question.  We could check from_tty at the
> call site, and not set pending breakpoints if no tty...

Why?