This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sourceware.org mailing list for the GDB project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 3:44 PM, Pedro Alves<pedro@codesourcery.com> wrote: >> > OTOH, if GDB is printing nothing, then printing a sole: >> > >> > ?"(no debugging symbols found)" >> > >> > out of the blue, doesn't ever seem useful to me. ?Is that ever really useful? >> >> Well, s@no debugging symbols found@no debugging symbols found in >> /usr/lib/libfoo.so@. > > What's the output in the non-auto-loaded case, then? > > ?"Reading symbols from /lib/librt.so.1... (no debugging symbols found in /lib/librt.so.1) ...done." > > ? Reading symbols from /lib/librt.so.1... (no debugging symbols found) ...done. The patch knows it has already printed the path in that case. >> Users would like to know that something isn't going to work because >> debug info is missing. >> That is useful. > > It is useful to know when a module doesn't have debug info, sure, but, > that transient warning has been printed like that for years, as is, > without showing the shared library name. ?In that state, I'm not sure > how useful it has been. ?It appears to me we have some freedom to play > with it, and when it is printed. True. >> We could tell them differently of course. ?Maybe an option to "info >> shared" to only show the ones without debug info or some such. > > We do have a "Syms Read" column in info shared's output, maybe we > should extend that from "Yes, No" -> "Yes, Sorry-I've-tried-but-didn't-find-any, No". > Then the user could ask GDB if it has debug info any time, instead of having > to look up the log. "works for me" >> > Wouldn't tweaking the "no debugging symbols found" predicate make everyone happy? >> >> "Tweaking" as in only printing "no debugging symbols found [in >> /usr/lib/libfoo.so]" if (from_tty || info_verbose), and never printing >> it for auto-loaded libraries? > > s/auto-loaded libraries/auto-loaded libraries, modules, executables, whatnot/, > yes. I'm not sure if I'd be happy nor not, but see attached patch. > I'll back away from arguing now, and let you decide to do what you think > is best. ?I don't think I'll be miserable with the change. ?(though with a feeling > of wrongly named option in my stomach.) The attached patch adds an optional regex argument to "info shared" and marks in the output libraries without debugging info. With this addition, I don't see a real need for a "set print symbol-loading-warning/whatever" option, thus I deleted it. Ok to check in?
Attachment:
gdb-090710-symfile-7.patch.txt
Description: Text document
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |