From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19319 invoked by alias); 8 Jan 2008 13:47:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 19299 invoked by uid 22791); 8 Jan 2008 13:47:47 -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; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 13:47:20 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 280D098216; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 13:47:18 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (22.svnf5.xdsl.nauticom.net [209.195.183.55]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E19E398022; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 13:47:17 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from ) id 1JCEnU-00041z-B1; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 08:47:16 -0500 Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2008 13:47:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: dje@google.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, ARistovski@qnx.com, gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, RMansfield@qnx.com Subject: Re: [patch] IS_ABSOLUTE_PATH to handle both DOS and POSIX path st yles Message-ID: <20080108134716.GA15438@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Eli Zaretskii , dje@google.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, ARistovski@qnx.com, gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, RMansfield@qnx.com References: <20080106054030.GA10410@caradoc.them.org> <20080107213543.GA29902@caradoc.them.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: 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/msg00128.txt.bz2 On Tue, Jan 08, 2008 at 06:24:33AM +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > Yes, but why does GDB want to know at startup something about start.S > and crtn.S? I believe we need this information when building psymtabs. If not, it may be because we need symbol information for the program entry point. One or the other. > Anyway, whatever problems can happen with these calls if we adopt my > suggestion of a user option, they already happen today. So there's > nothing to lose here. True. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery