This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [PATCH] "info source" now includes producer string
- From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu dot org>
- To: Doug Evans <dje at google dot com>
- Cc: gdb-patches at sourceware dot org
- Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2015 22:50:10 +0200
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] "info source" now includes producer string
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <yjt2h9w52c4v dot fsf at ruffy dot mtv dot corp dot google dot com>
- Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu dot org>
> From: Doug Evans <dje@google.com>
> Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2015 12:41:52 -0800
>
> bash$ g++ -g -Og hello.cc -o hello
> bash$ gdb hello
> (gdb) start
> (gdb) info source
> Current source file is hello.cc
> Compilation directory is /home/dje
> Located in /home/dje/hello.cc
> Contains 8 lines.
> Source language is c++.
> Producer is GNU C++ 4.8.2 -mtune=generic -march=x86-64 -g -Og -fstack-protector.
> Compiled with DWARF 2 debugging format.
> Does not include preprocessor macro info.
Thanks.
> * NEWS: "info source" command now display producer string if present.
^^^^^^^
"displays"
> --- a/gdb/NEWS
> +++ b/gdb/NEWS
> @@ -113,6 +113,9 @@ VAX running Ultrix vax-*-ultrix*
> and "assf"), have been removed. Use the "sharedlibrary" command, or
> its alias "share", instead.
>
> +* The "info source" command now displays the producer string if it was
> + present in the debug info.
I wonder whether we should replace "producer" with something less
abstract. Would "compilation command line" be accurate enough?
> --- a/gdb/doc/gdb.texinfo
> +++ b/gdb/doc/gdb.texinfo
> @@ -16279,6 +16279,8 @@ its length, in lines,
> @item
> which programming language it is written in,
> @item
> +if the debug information provides it, the program that compiled the file,
Not just the program, but also its command line, right?
Okay with those fixed.