Re: Pending breakpoints on lines that don't exist

[Richard Guenther <rguenther at suse dot de>]

On Wed, 4 Jan 2012, Richard Guenther wrote:

> 
> [sorry for breaking threading, I'm not subscribed]
> 
> <quote>
> > Not to me, FWIW.  At the very least, we should have asked a different
> > question than we ask in the "normal" pending-breakpoint use case.
> ...
> I kind of like the idea.   But in this case, I think it would be
> too verbose. Currently, we have:
> 
>     (gdb) b foo.c:100
>     No line 100 in file "foo.c".
>     Make breakpoint pending on future shared library load? (y or [n]) n
> 
> I find that the error message is precise and complete. But I do not
> want to remove the option of making the breakpoint pending, because
> some users might have, in fact, meant what they were doing. And if
> the user made an error, do you think they would not understand what
> error they made that triggered the question?
> </quote>
> 
> OTOH what mostly happens to me is:
> 
> > gdb ./cc1
> GNU gdb (GDB) SUSE (7.3-98.1)
> ...
> (gdb) b expr.c:10850
> No line 10850 in file "/space/rguenther/src/svn/trunk/libcpp/expr.c".
> 
> because I meant /space/rguenther/src/svn/trunk/gcc/expr.c!  Now
> getting the pending breakpoing seems to be even worse.  I'd
> expect sth like
> 
> (gdb) b expr.c:10850
> No line 10850 in file "/space/rguenther/src/svn/trunk/libcpp/expr.c"
> Use alternate source file /space/rguenther/src/svn/trunk/gcc/expr.c? (y or 
> [n])
> 
> it's especially bad that gdb does not recognize
> 
> (gdb) b gcc/expr.c:10850

Oh, and with this gdb 7.3 (Fedora) already does

(gdb) b gcc/expr.c:10850
No source file named gcc/expr.c.
Make breakpoint pending on future shared library load? (y or [n]) n

Richard.