This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: pathmap semantics issues
- To: Christopher Faylor <cgf at redhat dot com>
- Subject: Re: pathmap semantics issues
- From: Fernando Nasser <fnasser at cygnus dot com>
- Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2000 08:50:18 +0000
- CC: gdb at sources dot redhat dot com, gdb-patches at sources dot redhat dot com
- Organization: Red Hat Canada Ltd. - Toronto
- References: <200011221653.LAA22540@texas.cygnus.com> <20001122115802.B7346@redhat.com>
Christopher Faylor wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 22, 2000 at 11:53:38AM -0500, David Taylor wrote:
> >Okay, here's some questions concerning how pathmap should behave:
> >
> >. should it translate all paths? Or just some paths? If some, which?
> >Source paths? Others? That is, should it be consulted when looking
> >for sources?, objects?, executables?, and shared objects?
> >
> >. should it be searched instead of the existing path? Or in addition?
> >If in addition, which should be searched first?
> >
> >Do people care?
>
> I would think that it should be "all paths". If you've gone to the
> effort of issuing the pathmap command then it must be for the reason
> that you don't have the specific path on your system and need to
> translate it. So, using the pathmap translation for everything would
> make sense, IMO.
>
I agree with Chris.
--
Fernando Nasser
Red Hat Canada Ltd. E-Mail: fnasser@redhat.com
2323 Yonge Street, Suite #300
Toronto, Ontario M4P 2C9