This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [patch] GDB 7.2: new feature for "backtrace" that cuts path to file (remain filename)
- From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu dot org>
- To: pedro at codesourcery dot com
- Cc: hal9000ed2k at gmail dot com, tromey at redhat dot com, dje at google dot com, gdb-patches at sourceware dot org, pmuldoon at redhat dot com, brobecker at adacore dot com, drow at false dot org, jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com
- Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2011 00:17:19 -0500
- Subject: Re: [patch] GDB 7.2: new feature for "backtrace" that cuts path to file (remain filename)
- References: <BANLkTinD+9_Mkug8o2VhZ03L6XSriL_RKQ@mail.gmail.com> <201112041901.04599.pedro@codesourcery.com> <83hb1gaz88.fsf@gnu.org> <201112042100.17292.pedro@codesourcery.com> <83fwgzbrp9.fsf@gnu.org>
- Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu dot org>
> Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2011 05:52:34 +0200
> From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
> Cc: hal9000ed2k@gmail.com, tromey@redhat.com, dje@google.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org, pmuldoon@redhat.com, brobecker@adacore.com, drow@false.org, jan.kratochvil@redhat.com
> Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
>
> And what about the question I asked regarding the default? AFAIK, the
> current behavior is equivalent to `basename', not to `full'.
I think I know the answer. We show by default whatever the compiler
saw on its command line when it compiled the source file. E.g., if
the command was
gcc -c ... /foo/bar/baz.c
then GDB will show "/foo/bar/baz.c", but if the compilation command
was
gcc -c ... baz.c
then GDB will show "baz.c".
Is that correct? If so, calling this `full' is misleading, I think,
unless we really change GDB to always show a full absolute file name
there. If we don't want to change, I suggest to call it `normal' or
maybe `default' (with explanation along the above lines).