This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [patch] GDB 7.2: new feature for "backtrace" that cuts path to file (remain filename)
- From: Pedro Alves <pedro at codesourcery dot com>
- To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu dot org>
- 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: Tue, 6 Dec 2011 12:46:15 +0000
- 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> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com>
On Monday 05 December 2011 03:52:34, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > From: Pedro Alves <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> > $ pwd
> > /foo/bar
> > $ gcc a/b.c
> > If the debug info supports a notion of compilation directory (DW_AT_comp_dir
> > in dwarf), the full name is /foo/bar/a/b.c and the compilation
> > directory is /foo/bar. The no-compilation-directory option
> > would the show a/b.c .
> > I'd rather have a positive option, rather than a negative one (no-|without-),
> > but I'm failing to find a better name. I thought of "relative",
> > but that's not entirely accurate -- it can be a full path too. I can live
> > with no-compilation-directory. Just saying I tried and failed.
> How about `relative-to-compilation-directory'? Or just `relative'
> (since we use `full', not `full-absolute-file-name')?
Hmm, yeah, explaining "relative" in terms of
"relative to compilation directory" makes it okay, I suppose.