Why gdb 6.5 prints fullname in /cygdrive/... format om Windows?

> Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2006 13:44:05 +0200 (CEST)
> From: Mark Kettenis <mark.kettenisxs4all.nl>
> CC: Nikolay.MolchanovSun.COM, gdbsourceware.org
> 
> > Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2006 15:55:40 +0300
> > From: Eli Zaretskii <elizgnu.org>
> > 
> > > Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 22:26:55 -0700
> > > From: Nikolay Molchanov
<Nikolay.MolchanovSun.COM>
> > > Cc: gdbsourceware.org
> > > 
> > > I hope we will never need to set a breakpoint
in a file,
> > > which name has double quotes 
> > 
> > MS-Windows filesystems don't allow file names
with double quotes, so
> > you needn't worry about that.
> 
> But POSIX systems do allow it:

Do they also have drive letters?  The original discussion
was about
file names such as C:/Documents and Settings/foo.c.

In other words, this whole thread was about Windows file
names with
spaces in them.  So POSIX file-name (un)restrictions are not
really
relevant.

> From: Andreas Schwab <schwabsuse.de>
> Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2006 14:31:33 +0200
> 
> Mark Kettenis <mark.kettenisxs4all.nl> writes:
> 
> >> Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2006 15:55:40 +0300
> >> From: Eli Zaretskii <elizgnu.org>
> >> 
> >> > Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 22:26:55 -0700
> >> > From: Nikolay Molchanov
<Nikolay.MolchanovSun.COM>
> >> > Cc: gdbsourceware.org
> >> > 
> >> > I hope we will never need to set a
breakpoint in a file,
> >> > which name has double quotes 
> >> 
> >> MS-Windows filesystems don't allow file names
with double quotes, so
> >> you needn't worry about that.
> >
> > But POSIX systems do allow it:
> 
> s/POSIX/UNIX/
> 
> > $ touch \"
> > $ ls -l \"
> > -rw-r--r--   1 kettenis  kettenis          0 Aug
12 13:41 "
> 
> Just because it is possible does not mean it is useful.
 Once you start
> using quotes or other meta characters in file names gdb
will be the least
> of your problems.

Sure, but nobody in their right mind would include spaces in
their
filenames either.

Mark

> Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2006 17:20:20 +0300
> From: Eli Zaretskii <elizgnu.org>
> 
> > Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2006 13:44:05 +0200 (CEST)
> > From: Mark Kettenis <mark.kettenisxs4all.nl>
> > CC: Nikolay.MolchanovSun.COM, gdbsourceware.org
> > 
> > > Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2006 15:55:40 +0300
> > > From: Eli Zaretskii <elizgnu.org>
> > > 
> > > > Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 22:26:55 -0700
> > > > From: Nikolay Molchanov
<Nikolay.MolchanovSun.COM>
> > > > Cc: gdbsourceware.org
> > > > 
> > > > I hope we will never need to set a
breakpoint in a file,
> > > > which name has double quotes 
> > > 
> > > MS-Windows filesystems don't allow file
names with double quotes, so
> > > you needn't worry about that.
> > 
> > But POSIX systems do allow it:

Correctling myself, POSIX (EEE Std 1003.1-2001) itself
doesn't allow
allow double quotes.

> 
> Do they also have drive letters?  The original
discussion was about
> file names such as C:/Documents and Settings/foo.c.

Sigh, the Microsoft employee who came up with the bright
idea to put
spaces in standard directory names must have been a complete
moron.

Anyway, no they don't have drive names, but C: is a valid
filename on
OpenBSD, as are spaces.  So on OpenBSD your example is also
a possible
file name.  Of course nobody in their right mind would
actually create
such a name on an OpenBSD system.

> In other words, this whole thread was about Windows
file names with
> spaces in them.  So POSIX file-name (un)restrictions
are not really
> relevant.

Well, I might have missed something, but the discussion also
was about
quoting file names in commands, and I really hope you're
not
suggesting that we should have seperate quoting rules for
Windows and
POSIX-like systems.

Mark

On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 01:13:31PM -0700, Joel Brobecker
wrote:
> I will try to remember. IMO, it wouldn't be a bad idea
to design
> and implement the new syntax now. We can then decide to
do the major
> version number bump.

Yes, that's reasonable - although I personally have other
priorities,
so maybe for some future version bump 

I wrote up a piece about this long ago.  I think we're
going to need a
much more precise way of specifying locations: combinations
of symbols
in different source languages, shared objects, source files,
pathnames,
templates, and different inlining locations make this quite
a thorny
problem.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery

> > I will try to remember. IMO, it wouldn't be a bad
idea to design
> > and implement the new syntax now. We can then
decide to do the major
> > version number bump.
> 
> Yes, that's reasonable - although I personally have
other priorities,
> so maybe for some future version bump 

I know what you mean . That's
why I suggested working on this first,
whenever that might happen, and then do the version number
bump, rather
than having the version number drive when we work on it.

-- 
Joel