From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6454 invoked by alias); 7 Mar 2012 16:09:23 -0000 Received: (qmail 6442 invoked by uid 22791); 7 Mar 2012 16:09:20 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,TW_XS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 07 Mar 2012 16:08:57 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37ACA1C69D5; Wed, 7 Mar 2012 11:08:57 -0500 (EST) 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 N9IoWCj-at43; Wed, 7 Mar 2012 11:08:57 -0500 (EST) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDDFF1C69D0; Wed, 7 Mar 2012 11:08:56 -0500 (EST) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id AF3F0145615; Wed, 7 Mar 2012 08:08:51 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2012 16:09:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Yao Qi Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: New ARI warning Sun Mar 4 01:53:53 UTC 2012 Message-ID: <20120307160851.GO2853@adacore.com> References: <20120304015353.GA4975@sourceware.org> <4F52E18A.3050201@codesourcery.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4F52E18A.3050201@codesourcery.com> 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: 2012-03/txt/msg00224.txt.bz2 Hi Yao, I wish I had taken the time to answer a little sooner. Sorry about that. I hope it doesn't give the impression that we're disinterested. First of all, a big thank you for keeping on eye on the new ARI regressions, it's always appreciated when one doesn't have to ping about it. > >> gdb/remote.c:10757: code: sprintf: Do not use sprintf, instead use xsnprintf or xstrprintf > > gdb/remote.c:10757: sprintf (rs->buf, ', use); > > Looks like sprintf has been widely used in gdb/remote.c, so I'll > give a separate fix. That would be awesome. This behavior has been expanding just because we're repeating the current patterns. > >> gdb/common/agent.c:193: regression: strerror: Do not use strerror(), instead use safe_strerror() > > gdb/common/agent.c:193: path, strerror (errno)); > > We don't have a safe_strerror in GDBserver, so I am inclined to wrap > strerror by safe_strerror in GDBserver. Not sure I understand what you are proposing here... Pedro is probably your best reviewer anyway. I had a look at safe_strerror, just to see what it's about. It's mostly about not returning NULL, it seems. But the implementation is dependent on the host (Windows or POSIX), so it could be a pain to move to common. -- Joel