From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 30639 invoked by alias); 28 Nov 2012 22:44:34 -0000 Received: (qmail 30630 invoked by uid 22791); 28 Nov 2012 22:44:34 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS 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; Wed, 28 Nov 2012 22:44:30 +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 qASMiQVL013725 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 28 Nov 2012 17:44:26 -0500 Received: from host2.jankratochvil.net (ovpn-116-104.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.116.104]) by int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id qASMiMgL003483 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 28 Nov 2012 17:44:24 -0500 Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2012 22:44:00 -0000 From: Jan Kratochvil To: Pedro Alves Cc: Mike Frysinger , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [patch+7.5.1] Work around PR libc/13097 "linux-vdso.so.1" #3 Message-ID: <20121128224421.GA31724@host2.jankratochvil.net> References: <20121122201737.GA32172@host2.jankratochvil.net> <20121123123952.GA15371@host2.jankratochvil.net> <50AF9DBF.1090406@redhat.com> <201211271659.11975.vapier@gentoo.org> <50B558BF.5040300@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <50B558BF.5040300@redhat.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: 2012-11/txt/msg00836.txt.bz2 On Wed, 28 Nov 2012 01:20:15 +0100, Pedro Alves wrote: > I mentioned that this change could make it possible to find the separate > debug file by name. I do not see how it could work, vDSO does not have and cannot have any disk filename in L_NAME. Besides that even if there was a way non-build-id verification should never be implemented for anything new, it does not work well and there is no reason for it. Jan