From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12741 invoked by alias); 17 Apr 2008 21:45:28 -0000 Received: (qmail 12732 invoked by uid 22791); 17 Apr 2008 21:45:28 -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; Thu, 17 Apr 2008 21:45:08 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24E34983D6; Thu, 17 Apr 2008 21:45:06 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (22.svnf5.xdsl.nauticom.net [209.195.183.55]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DEE83982C4; Thu, 17 Apr 2008 21:45:05 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Jmbuj-0002Rq-3s; Thu, 17 Apr 2008 17:45:05 -0400 Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2008 22:32:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Ulrich Weigand Cc: Joel Brobecker , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [RFA/solib-svr4] use AT_BASE auxiliary entry to compute load base address Message-ID: <20080417214505.GA9147@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Ulrich Weigand , Joel Brobecker , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <20080417173711.GN17488@caradoc.them.org> <200804172131.m3HLVISH007144@d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200804172131.m3HLVISH007144@d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.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: 2008-04/txt/msg00373.txt.bz2 On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 11:31:18PM +0200, Ulrich Weigand wrote: > Yes, that's on my to-do list anyway ... > > However, even that would not fix the same issue with core files > (if prelink changed a library between core file generation and > use in GDB). Drat. And even if that bit is in the core file (likely on at least some vendor kernels; program headers are in the same page as the build-id note) we would not know where to look for it. I don't want to revert the patch, since it fixes a nasty breakage if you connect to a program when it has just started running but has gone a few instructions, i.e. the library list is not filled in yet but the PC is not the dynamic linker entry point. Is there really no way to differentiate these two cases? -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery