This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [RFA/Windows] Remove ADD_SHARED_SYMBOL_FILES macro
- From: Joel Brobecker <brobecker at adacore dot com>
- To: Pedro Alves <pedro at codesourcery dot com>
- Cc: gdb-patches at sourceware dot org, Pierre Muller <muller at ics dot u-strasbg dot fr>
- Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2009 13:49:50 -0700
- Subject: Re: [RFA/Windows] Remove ADD_SHARED_SYMBOL_FILES macro
- References: <003d01c9d4e2$987399a0$c95acce0$@u-strasbg.fr> <006e01c9dd14$5a9cf510$0fd6df30$@u-strasbg.fr> <20090525225725.GI23016@adacore.com> <200905260014.02926.pedro@codesourcery.com>
[trying to catch up on email...]
> On Monday 25 May 2009 23:57:25, Joel Brobecker wrote:
> > > (_initialize _symfile): Move "add-shared-symbol-files"
> > > command and "assf" alias.
> > > * windows-nat.c (_initialize_windows_nat): to here.
> > > Change "add-shared-symbol-files" to alias.
> >
> > I propose we deprecate these aliases as well; does it really make sense
> > to have 2 identical commands?
> >
>
> Well, let me go the other way around. Why is "dll-symbols" needed
> at all? Why isn't "add-symbol-file" good enough? Other than the
> ugly safe_symbol_file_add hack that would be nice to get rid of,
> and setting OBJF_SHARED (itself dubious) it doesn't have anything Windows
> specific at all (magically appending ".dll" doesn't count).
I would love to get rid of these commands if they are indeed equivalent
to add-symbol-file. I assumed that there was a reason for the different
command name. Chris, do you remember?
--
Joel