This is the mail archive of the
insight@sourceware.org
mailing list for the Insight project.
Re: [patch] suppress annoying warnings about cygwin1.dbg
On Wed, Apr 18, 2007 at 08:19:44AM -0700, Brian Dessent wrote:
>Christopher Faylor wrote:
>
>> Cygwin really isn't doing anything terrifically special with its use of
>> .dbg, AFAIK. So, it seems to me that, if this is fixed, it should be fixed
>> in a generic fashion so that everyone can benefit.
>
>It's easy enough to change the regexp so that it matches any filename; I
>had it only matching cygwin*.dbg just to be conservative. The problem
>then becomes that if there was ever a situation where this message was
>legitimately desired, now you don't get it. And by matching only
>cygwin*.dbg, I carefully avoid the problem of not stepping on the toes
>of other platforms that don't have this problem at all, where that
>message might not be bogus.
>
>Of course, the "generic fashion" already exists in the form of
>win32-nat.c:safe_symbol_file_add(), which knows to turn off all warnings
>and re-enable them again at the right place. But this information is
>never conveyed to the Insight frontend, so it's left to guess everything
>based on regexps.
>
>How about a patch that modifies gdbtk-hooks.c:gdbtk_warning() such that
>instead of just blindly punting everything to gdbtk_tcl_warning(), it
>first tries to check if stdout has been redirected to a null handle, and
>just skip the warning if so? That would let the exiting stuff in
>win32-nat.c take care of suppressing these without any regexps.
I wonder if there is just something being missed here. The cygwin1.dbg
stuff was adapted from linux. It is the mechanism used by Red Hat to
create debuginfo rpms. If this isn't working in insight is there
something not quite right in gdb itself? Or is the cygwin .dbg procedure
not putting some crucial information into the .dbg file? I did have to
make some concessions to PE when I created that file since the standard
linux method didn't work quite right.
cgf