From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 32703 invoked by alias); 4 Jan 2008 12:46:38 -0000 Received: (qmail 32695 invoked by uid 22791); 4 Jan 2008 12:46:37 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from NaN.false.org (HELO nan.false.org) (208.75.86.248) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Fri, 04 Jan 2008 12:46:16 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CEDAA98120; Fri, 4 Jan 2008 12:46:13 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (22.svnf5.xdsl.nauticom.net [209.195.183.55]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8EA319801D; Fri, 4 Jan 2008 12:46:13 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from ) id 1JAlwB-000742-Rq; Fri, 04 Jan 2008 07:46:11 -0500 Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2008 12:46:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Joel Brobecker Cc: Vladimir Prus , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFA] Handle solaris dynamic linker name change. Message-ID: <20080104124611.GA26872@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Joel Brobecker , Vladimir Prus , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <200712242048.33983.vladimir@codesourcery.com> <20080104054951.GB28411@adacore.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080104054951.GB28411@adacore.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-12-11) X-IsSubscribed: yes 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: 2008-01/txt/msg00054.txt.bz2 On Thu, Jan 03, 2008 at 09:49:51PM -0800, Joel Brobecker wrote: > Within the same idea, how about making this a gdbarch method/function? > The default value would be a function that does a *filename_cmp* > (first improvement introduced by your patch ;-), and on solaris, > we would provide a function that first does a filename_cmp, and > if that fails, then looks at the specific name. > > I'd like the feedback from other maintainers about this. I think it's fine with that improvement or without it; I really doubt the code will trigger anywhere else. My two cents. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery