From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21280 invoked by alias); 9 Jun 2002 16:39:50 -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 21269 invoked from network); 9 Jun 2002 16:39:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO walton.kettenis.dyndns.org) (213.93.114.42) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 9 Jun 2002 16:39:48 -0000 Received: from elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org (elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org [192.168.0.2]) by walton.kettenis.dyndns.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g59Gdks00626; Sun, 9 Jun 2002 18:39:46 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from kettenis@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org) Received: (from kettenis@localhost) by elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g59Gdko39950; Sun, 9 Jun 2002 18:39:46 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from kettenis) Date: Sun, 09 Jun 2002 09:39:00 -0000 From: Mark Kettenis Message-Id: <200206091639.g59Gdko39950@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org> To: ac131313@cygnus.com CC: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com In-reply-to: <3D038031.4010607@cygnus.com> (message from Andrew Cagney on Sun, 09 Jun 2002 12:20:01 -0400) Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFA]: Adapt solib-svr4.c for recent gdbarch_data changes References: <200206091526.g59FQQ405652@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org> <3D038031.4010607@cygnus.com> X-SW-Source: 2002-06/txt/msg00145.txt.bz2 Date: Sun, 09 Jun 2002 12:20:01 -0400 From: Andrew Cagney > Discovered this moring that my gdb was crashing. Seems like we have > an initialization cycle here. I think that after Andrew's patch we > can simplify init_fetch_link_map_offsets as in the attached patch. Oops! The target I tried this on sets the link map offset. (So this also means that the cycle test works?) Yup! > OK to check this in? > * solib-svr4.c (init_fetch_link_map_offsets): Simply return > legacy_fetch_link_map_offsets. Adjust comment to reflect reality > after Andrew's 2002-06-08 gdbarch change. I think it might have to go under an ``obvious fix''. I definitly broke the code and the way you've changed things is the only way to do it. I just wasn't completely sure. Committed now. Mark