From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 31090 invoked by alias); 27 Jan 2010 00:06:04 -0000 Received: (qmail 31029 invoked by uid 22791); 27 Jan 2010 00:06:04 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KAM_STOCKGEN,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail.codesourcery.com (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (38.113.113.100) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 00:05:59 +0000 Received: (qmail 386 invoked from network); 27 Jan 2010 00:05:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO caradoc.them.org) (dan@127.0.0.2) by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 27 Jan 2010 00:05:57 -0000 Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2010 00:06:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Jan Kratochvil Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [patch] Comment symbol->symtab NULL [Re: [patch] Fix solib-display.exp crash] Message-ID: <20100127000552.GA29830@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Jan Kratochvil , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <20100119234001.GA9151@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> <20100126212425.GB17877@caradoc.them.org> <20100126235016.GA31019@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20100126235016.GA31019@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) 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: 2010-01/txt/msg00588.txt.bz2 On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 12:50:16AM +0100, Jan Kratochvil wrote: > On Tue, 26 Jan 2010 22:24:25 +0100, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 12:40:01AM +0100, Jan Kratochvil wrote: > > > The question is whether SYMBOL_SYMTAB (symbol) can be ever NULL at this point. > > > IMO not, it can be NULL only temporarily during reading symbols. > > > > I think that's right; this patch is fine. Thanks! > > Checked-in: > http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-cvs/2010-01/msg00217.html > > > OK to check-in this comment? Sure. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery