Re: [RFA] New substitute-path commands

[Andrew STUBBS <andrew dot stubbs at st dot com>]

Joel Brobecker wrote:
> At least one user suggested that we provide the possibility of applying
> a list of substitution rules as opposed to one. I'm not against that
> idea, but this makes the design and implementation slightly more complex
> for something that I think will be little used. I suspect that most
> people will use it in a very specific context where the entire source
> tree has been moved - so one substitution rule should be enough.

Another use case would be where one is trying to identify a problem in a 
library. There may be many of these and each could be in its own source 
tree.

We, here at ST, include a number of libraries (Newlib, our OS, posix 
etc.) with our toolsets, all with debug information built in. We make 
the sources available to our customers, either as part of the 
installation or a separate package, but we have no knowledge of where 
they will install them in their own systems and there is no reason why 
the various parts have to be installed in the same place.

It would be very useful if the ability to add multiple substitutions 
were there from the start.

Additionally, it would be nice if there were a command line option for 
this, similar to --directory, although --eval-command will do the job.

> +/* Extract the first argument (possibly quoted) from ARGS, and return it.
> +   ARGS is updated to point right after that first argument.
> +   The returned value must be deallocated afterwards.
> +   
> +   Return NULL is an argument could not be found.  */

What's wrong with buildargv() in libiberty?

Andrew Stubbs