This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: New ARI warning Sat Aug 14 01:53:52 UTC 2010
- From: Vladimir Prus <vladimir at codesourcery dot com>
- To: gdb-patches at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2010 13:39:10 +0400
- Subject: Re: New ARI warning Sat Aug 14 01:53:52 UTC 2010
- Followup-to: gmane.comp.gdb.patches
- References: <20100814015352.GA10686@sourceware.org>
GDB Administrator wrote:
> 814a815,817
>> gdb/mi/mi-main.c:1512: code: sprintf: Do not use sprintf, instead use xstrprintf
> gdb/mi/mi-main.c:1512: sprintf (p, ', read_result->data[i]);
This warning is bogus in this context. How do I silence it?
>> gdb/mi/mi-main.c:1490: gettext: _ markup: All messages should be marked up with _.
> gdb/mi/mi-main.c:1490: error ("Unable to read memory.");
>> gdb/mi/mi-main.c:1582: gettext: _ markup: All messages should be marked up with _.
> gdb/mi/mi-main.c:1582: error ("mi_cmd_data_write_memory: Usage: [-o COLUMN_OFFSET] ADDR FORMAT
> WORD-SIZE VALUE."); 821a825
>> gdb/mi/mi-main.c:1738: gettext: _ markup: All messages should be marked up with _.
> gdb/mi/mi-main.c:1738: error ("the specified thread group does not exist");
Of above warnings, only first appears to be added by a recent patch of mine,
while others were there all the time. That said, have we ever decided if MI
should try to i18n its error messages? At least some of messages, like
"Unable to read memory" above, can probably be shown to user -- except it's
so generic as to be useless. Some messages, clearly, indicate frontend
bugs and showing them to users, or l10n-ing, makes no sense.
Comments?
- Volodya