This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [RFA/Windows] Remove ADD_SHARED_SYMBOL_FILES macro
- From: Christopher Faylor <cgf-use-the-mailinglist-please at sourceware dot org>
- To: gdb-patches at sourceware dot org, Pedro Alves <pedro at codesourcery dot com>, Joel Brobecker <brobecker at adacore dot com>, Pierre Muller <muller at ics dot u-strasbg dot fr>
- Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2009 21:54:41 -0400
- Subject: Re: [RFA/Windows] Remove ADD_SHARED_SYMBOL_FILES macro
- References: <003d01c9d4e2$987399a0$c95acce0$@u-strasbg.fr> <006e01c9dd14$5a9cf510$0fd6df30$@u-strasbg.fr> <20090525225725.GI23016@adacore.com> <200905260014.02926.pedro@codesourcery.com> <20090622204950.GC7766@adacore.com>
On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 01:49:50PM -0700, Joel Brobecker wrote:
>[trying to catch up on email...]
>
>> On Monday 25 May 2009 23:57:25, Joel Brobecker wrote:
>> > > (_initialize _symfile): Move "add-shared-symbol-files"
>> > > command and "assf" alias.
>> > > * windows-nat.c (_initialize_windows_nat): to here.
>> > > Change "add-shared-symbol-files" to alias.
>> >
>> > I propose we deprecate these aliases as well; does it really make sense
>> > to have 2 identical commands?
>> >
>>
>>Well, let me go the other way around. Why is "dll-symbols" needed at
>>all? Why isn't "add-symbol-file" good enough? Other than the ugly
>>safe_symbol_file_add hack that would be nice to get rid of, and setting
>>OBJF_SHARED (itself dubious) it doesn't have anything Windows specific
>>at all (magically appending ".dll" doesn't count).
>
>I would love to get rid of these commands if they are indeed equivalent
>to add-symbol-file. I assumed that there was a reason for the
>different command name. Chris, do you remember?
(gdb) add-symbol-file cygwin1.dll
The address where cygwin1.dll has been loaded is missing
(gdb) dll cygwin1.dll
(gdb) l dll_crt0
952 _main_tls = &_my_tls;
953 _main_tls->call ((DWORD (*) (void *, void *)) dll_crt0_1, NULL);
954 }
955
956 void
957 dll_crt0 (per_process *uptr)
958 {
959 /* Set the local copy of the pointer into the user space. */
960 if (!in_forkee && uptr && uptr != user_data)
961 {
As I have previously mentioned, the commands are not equivalent.
cgf