This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [PATCH] Make only user-specified executable filenames sticky
- From: Gary Benson <gbenson at redhat dot com>
- To: Philippe Waroquiers <philippe dot waroquiers at skynet dot be>
- Cc: gdb-patches at sourceware dot org, Pedro Alves <palves at redhat dot com>
- Date: Wed, 6 May 2015 16:41:38 +0100
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] Make only user-specified executable filenames sticky
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <20150505151448 dot GA1417 at blade dot nx> <1430907977-30605-1-git-send-email-gbenson at redhat dot com> <1430923587 dot 2177 dot 4 dot camel at soleil>
Philippe Waroquiers wrote:
> On Wed, 2015-05-06 at 11:26 +0100, Gary Benson wrote:
> > In GDB some executable files are supplied by the user (e.g. using
> > a "file" command) and some are determined by GDB (e.g. while
> > processing an "attach" command). GDB will not attempt to
> > determine a filename if one has been set. This causes problems if
> > you attach to one process and then attach to another: GDB will not
> > attempt to discover the main executable on the second attach. If
> > the two processes have different main executable files then the
> > symbols will now be wrong.
> >
> > This commit updates GDB to keep track of which executable
> > filenames were supplied by the user. When GDB might attempt to
> > determine an executable filename and one is already set, filenames
> > determined by GDB may be overridden but user-supplied filenames
> > will not.
>
> If not overriding the file set by the user, maybe GDB could/should
> give a warning when the exec-file reported by the target does not
> match the file as set by the user ?
I'm wondering whether we should always override the executable file,
and treat the symbol file as the special one. Pedro?
Cheers,
Gary
--
http://gbenson.net/