From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7215 invoked by alias); 12 Jun 2012 17:00:54 -0000 Received: (qmail 7180 invoked by uid 22791); 12 Jun 2012 17:00:46 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 12 Jun 2012 17:00:33 +0000 Received: from int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.25]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q5CH0FSj019771 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 12 Jun 2012 13:00:17 -0400 Received: from host2.jankratochvil.net (ovpn-116-33.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.116.33]) by int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q5CH0Bre002507 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 12 Jun 2012 13:00:14 -0400 Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2012 17:00:00 -0000 From: Jan Kratochvil To: Joel Brobecker Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [RFA] Add support for --enable-lmcheck configure option. Message-ID: <20120612170010.GA8015@host2.jankratochvil.net> References: <1339447127-314-1-git-send-email-brobecker@adacore.com> <20120612074215.GB4374@host2.jankratochvil.net> <20120612165523.GR2687@adacore.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120612165523.GR2687@adacore.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) 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: 2012-06/txt/msg00366.txt.bz2 On Tue, 12 Jun 2012 18:55:23 +0200, Joel Brobecker wrote: > This is absolutely wrong. Maybe some people might want to use it that > way, but that is not my goal. It seemed easy to assume that, but that > is not the case. I think it is a very valuable addition for developers, > and I just fixed one buffer overflow thanks to it yesterday. And I expect > that all AdaCore developers will be building GDB with -lmcheck, even > the release versions. OK, if it is therefore for the purpose of regular use of a development snapshot (like what I did for Fedora Rawhide) then I agree it makes sense. Still: > I read your answer as: "I do not object, but I don't think it is useful". Thanks, Jan