From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27681 invoked by alias); 14 Aug 2002 11:03:53 -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 27541 invoked from network); 14 Aug 2002 11:03:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO balder.inter.net.il) (192.114.186.15) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 14 Aug 2002 11:03:50 -0000 Received: from Zaretsky ([80.230.2.40]) by balder.inter.net.il (Mirapoint Messaging Server MOS 3.1.0.58-GA) with ESMTP id BQW04586; Wed, 14 Aug 2002 14:03:44 +0300 (IDT) Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2002 04:03:00 -0000 From: "Eli Zaretskii" To: jason-swarelist@molenda.com Message-Id: <7263-Wed14Aug2002140112+0300-eliz@is.elta.co.il> CC: gdb@sources.redhat.com In-reply-to: <20020813152124.A97909@molenda.com> (message from Jason Molenda on Tue, 13 Aug 2002 15:21:24 -0700) Subject: Re: RFC gdb crashes on watchpoint that's no longer valid Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii References: <20020813152124.A97909@molenda.com> X-SW-Source: 2002-08/txt/msg00140.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);