From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7502 invoked by alias); 15 Dec 2004 17:27:17 -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 27581 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2004 17:12:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO smtp2.wanadoo.fr) (193.252.22.29) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 15 Dec 2004 17:12:45 -0000 Received: from me-wanadoo.net (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by mwinf0201.wanadoo.fr (SMTP Server) with SMTP id 593491C00478; Wed, 15 Dec 2004 18:12:44 +0100 (CET) Received: from takamaka.act-europe.fr (ABoulogne-102-1-3-174.w193-253.abo.wanadoo.fr [193.253.180.174]) by mwinf0201.wanadoo.fr (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id DFC611C0046D; Wed, 15 Dec 2004 18:12:43 +0100 (CET) Received: by takamaka.act-europe.fr (Postfix, from userid 507) id 4649147DAD; Wed, 15 Dec 2004 21:12:40 +0400 (RET) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 18:29:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Randolph Chung Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFA/hpux] SEGV when running program using dlopen Message-ID: <20041215171240.GR964@adacore.com> References: <20041215073206.GM964@adacore.com> <20041215163628.GY29171@tausq.org> <20041215165738.GQ964@adacore.com> <20041215170602.GB29171@tausq.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20041215170602.GB29171@tausq.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-SW-Source: 2004-12/txt/msg00387.txt.bz2 > yeah, seems a bit bogus :) i think it works only because export stubs > normally occur earlier in a file than the real function; but i suppose > that doesn't have to be the case. Either that, or the ordering of the symbols in our data structures can change. > > AFAIK, it provides some help in debugging by exporting some specified > > symbols. The only use I know of if with shared libraries... > > ok, thanks. your patch looks good; i'm still wondering if we should have > unified logic to search for (export|import) stubs... but that's for > later. I thought about this too, actually. I think it's a great idea. The patch will be slightly larger, but I can export the new code into a function and call that. Might be useful elsewhere, and will make the code a bit cleaner in any case. If you prefer, you can also take my patch, adapt it, and do the commit. -- Joel (GMT + 4, so time to sign off)