From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11342 invoked by alias); 28 Sep 2007 18:31:55 -0000 Received: (qmail 11332 invoked by uid 22791); 28 Sep 2007 18:31:54 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Fri, 28 Sep 2007 18:31:48 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA5C62AAD9B; Fri, 28 Sep 2007 14:31:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: from rock.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rock.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id D6t0jA2GNBp6; Fri, 28 Sep 2007 14:31:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 715042AAD96; Fri, 28 Sep 2007 14:31:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 3EEBAE7B58; Fri, 28 Sep 2007 11:31:44 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2007 18:31:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Pierre Muller Cc: 'Adriaan van Os' , gpc@gnu.de, gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [RFC-3] Handle GPC specific name for main function Message-ID: <20070928183144.GA4305@adacore.com> References: <000001c800d8$21cbcf00$65636d00$@u-strasbg.fr> <46FB5E2C.6080606@microbizz.nl> <46FB5F76.9050501@microbizz.nl> <000001c800dc$14b0df00$3e129d00$@u-strasbg.fr> <20070927121107.GB27706@caradoc.them.org> <001b01c80102$e371af60$aa550e20$@u-strasbg.fr> <20070927124020.GA29185@caradoc.them.org> <20070927162039.GC3787@adacore.com> <20070927163217.GD3787@adacore.com> <000601c8014e$7f7c2b60$7e748220$@u-strasbg.fr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <000601c8014e$7f7c2b60$7e748220$@u-strasbg.fr> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i 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 X-SW-Source: 2007-09/txt/msg00424.txt.bz2 > To avoid false positives on the second version mainly, > it is better. Right, that makes sense indeed. For some reason, I thought that the second symbol name was "MAIN__", not "pascal_main_program". I was confused. I still agree with Daniel that the current patch is quite reasonable. If "pascal_main_program" ends up being a problem in practic, we have the option of stop supporting GPC version older than 20070217, when it was replaced by '_p__M0_main_program' (more than 2 years ago, now). -- Joel