From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22789 invoked by alias); 24 Jan 2002 16:35:58 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 22689 invoked from network); 24 Jan 2002 16:35:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nevyn.them.org) (128.2.145.6) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 24 Jan 2002 16:35:50 -0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 16Tmqs-0006qB-00; Thu, 24 Jan 2002 11:35:50 -0500 Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 08:35:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: Michael Snyder , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFA] New option "trust-readonly-sections" Message-ID: <20020124113550.A26125@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Eli Zaretskii , Michael Snyder , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <20020124004435.A11710@nevyn.them.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.23i X-SW-Source: 2002-01/txt/msg00723.txt.bz2 On Thu, Jan 24, 2002 at 09:22:09AM +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > On Thu, 24 Jan 2002, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > > > I'd rather see this default to on. > > That would be an incompatible change. I think we should avoid such > changes, unless we have a very good reason. Stan's reply was convincing. i guess I've been spoiled by protected-memory situations. I'd personally like to object to your objection though, Eli. Performance can be a very good reason. If it wasn't for the other drawbacks, I'd consider the argument. Perhaps I'm in the minority there, though. -- Daniel Jacobowitz Carnegie Mellon University MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer