From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23065 invoked by alias); 22 May 2014 12:56:29 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 23051 invoked by uid 89); 22 May 2014 12:56:28 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Thu, 22 May 2014 12:56:27 +0000 Received: from int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.26]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s4MCuJC2023025 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 22 May 2014 08:56:19 -0400 Received: from blade.nx (ovpn-116-100.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.116.100]) by int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s4MCuIWh023579; Thu, 22 May 2014 08:56:18 -0400 Received: by blade.nx (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 82E67262413; Thu, 22 May 2014 13:56:17 +0100 (BST) Date: Thu, 22 May 2014 12:56:00 -0000 From: Gary Benson To: Joel Brobecker Cc: Tom Tromey , Stan Shebs , gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Florian Weimer , Mark Kettenis , Pedro Alves Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Demangler crash handler Message-ID: <20140522125617.GB15598@blade.nx> References: <20140509100656.GA4760@blade.nx> <201405091120.s49BKO1f010622@glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <87fvkhjqvs.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de> <53737737.2030901@redhat.com> <87ppj8s7my.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <537BA194.904@earthlink.net> <87tx8kqm3o.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <20140520202311.GK22822@adacore.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140520202311.GK22822@adacore.com> X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2014-05/txt/msg00541.txt.bz2 Joel Brobecker wrote: > Tom Tromey wrote: > > I realize there is an attractive quality to the "suffering is > > good for us" idea. It appeals to my inner spartan. However, > > I disagree very strongly with this. > > Having been on the receiving end of this kind of logic, I agree > with Tom - quite strongly too, in fact. As a user, I do not want > to be held hostage, especially when there is no workaround. If > the proposed solution brings no noticeable harm for our users > in the situation where things are working as expected, I think > we should consider it. And to help mitigating the fears that > we would be hiding bugs, we can perhaps find a middle-ground; > for instance, making sure that we print a really verbose error > message. I'm definitely not trying to hide bugs; if anything I'm trying to make them more reportable. FWIW users would see this: (gdb) set lang c++ (gdb) maint demangle _Z1-Av23*;cG~Wo2Vu /home/gary/work/archer/demangle-crashcatcher/src/gdb/cp-support.c:1590: internal-warning: unable to demangle '_Z1-Av23*;cG~Wo2Vu' (demangler failed with signal 11) A problem internal to GDB has been detected, further debugging may prove unreliable. Quit this debugging session? (y or n) A separate patch [1] I've posted augments this with the lines: This is a bug, please report it. For instructions, see: . The point is to make it easier for users to file straightforward bug reports *with reproducers* rather than the opaque "GDB crashed at startup" bugs we've been getting at the moment that people (by which I mean Keith) have had to spend time triaging. And, at the same time, for the user to have the option to attempt to continue using GDB to debug their program. I realise that people may feel that the user *should* then fix GDB, but not everyone has the time or the ability or the inclination. I don't want the workaround for this to become "try LLDB". Cheers, Gary -- [1] https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2014-05/msg00198.html