No subject
Michael Snyder
msnyder@cygnus.com
Mon Apr 6 14:36:00 GMT 1998
Stan Shebs wrote:
>
> Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1998 13:41:37 +0200 (MET DST)
> From: "Philippe De Muyter" <phdm@macqel.be>
>
> Am I the only one to have (sometimes) the problem of finding a non-executable
> with the same name earlier in my path than the program I want to debug ?
>
> Apparently. :-) But seriously, I don't think this change is a good idea.
> While it would work fine for native Unix debugging, it will lose for
> just about everything else. For both cross-Unix and embedded debugging
> you almost certainly want the programs *not* to be marked as executable,
> so that your current host doesn't try to execute them.
>
> However, if you set things up so that this test is only made when
> using a Unix child_ops, this would be a useful addition.
I don't think I have ever had this problem. Is it not the case
that GDB always looks in the "current working directory" first,
and only then looks along your path? (certainly I do not have
"current working directory" on my path!)
If the above is the case, then under what circumstances could
you have this problem? The only one that I can think of is if
you were trying to debug something that is NOT in your current
working directory, yet you did NOT give a path to the binary
that you wanted to debug.
In which case, I would have to ask, "why would you want to do that?"
Michael
More information about the Gdb-patches
mailing list