From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29533 invoked by alias); 17 Apr 2009 19:48:57 -0000 Received: (qmail 29524 invoked by uid 22791); 17 Apr 2009 19:48:57 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx2.redhat.com (HELO mx2.redhat.com) (66.187.237.31) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 17 Apr 2009 19:48:51 +0000 Received: from int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (int-mx2.corp.redhat.com [172.16.27.26]) by mx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n3HJmc97002515; Fri, 17 Apr 2009 15:48:38 -0400 Received: from ns3.rdu.redhat.com (ns3.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.255.199]) by int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id n3HJmblK017456; Fri, 17 Apr 2009 15:48:37 -0400 Received: from opsy.redhat.com (vpn-13-15.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.13.15]) by ns3.rdu.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n3HJmapw007196; Fri, 17 Apr 2009 15:48:36 -0400 Received: by opsy.redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 500) id AB9DA888034; Fri, 17 Apr 2009 13:48:35 -0600 (MDT) To: "Marc Khouzam" Cc: Subject: Re: Reporting proper line for breakpoints of non-executable lines References: <6D19CA8D71C89C43A057926FE0D4ADAA0748B502@ecamlmw720.eamcs.ericsson.se> From: Tom Tromey Reply-To: tromey@redhat.com Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2009 23:00:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <6D19CA8D71C89C43A057926FE0D4ADAA0748B502@ecamlmw720.eamcs.ericsson.se> (Marc Khouzam's message of "Fri\, 17 Apr 2009 13\:31\:53 -0400") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii 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: 2009-04/txt/msg00145.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Marc" == Marc Khouzam writes: Marc> I also noticed that in MI in HEAD, there is a new field to the reply Marc> of break-insert which is "original-location" which was added for a Marc> different reason Marc> http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2008-04/msg00272.html Marc> But I was thinking it would be nice to use that field to show where Marc> the user set the bp, while showing where the bp was really set by Marc> GDB in the other fields. Marc> Do it make sense? Yeah. For MI, I think the best thing would be to always report both locations, and then let the UI authors decide what to display. Tom