This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: handling of absolute source file paths
- From: "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz at gnu dot org>
- To: Baurjan Ismagulov <ibr at ata dot cs dot hun dot edu dot tr>
- Cc: gdb-patches at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Sat, 01 May 2004 21:11:41 +0200
- Subject: Re: handling of absolute source file paths
- References: <20040420154855.GD9020@ata.cs.hacettepe.edu.tr> <ud661962c.fsf@elta.co.il> <20040501171420.GB21679@ata.cs.hun.edu.tr>
- Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu dot org>
> Date: Sat, 1 May 2004 19:14:20 +0200
> From: Baurjan Ismagulov <ibr@ata.cs.hun.edu.tr>
>
> On Wed, Apr 21, 2004 at 08:51:55AM +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > Note that it doesn't specify what happens if the file's name starts
> > with a slash or otherwise has leading directories. It would be good
> > to augment the manual with a more explicit description of cases such
> > as yours. Would you like to do that?
>
> I've tried to do that.
Thanks.
> I've removed a paragraph that seemed no longer
> relevant. Please review.
A few minor comments, and then the patch can go in:
> +For example, suppose an executable references the file
> +@samp{/usr/src/foo-1.0/lib/foo.c}, and our source path is
First, file names should have the @file markup, not the @samp markup.
> The subdirectories of source path directories or
> +parts of the source pathname are not looked up.
Please say "source file name", not "source pathname". The GNU
project documentation does not use the term ``pathname''.
Also, this specific sentence is not very clear; perhaps an example
using the file names and the source path from your example would help
understand it better.
> Plain filenames,
> +relative pathnames, pathnames with dots, etc. are all treated as
> +described above.
Please add a ``@:'' after ``etc.'', so that TeX would not typeset
that as an end of a sentence.