From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19871 invoked by alias); 22 Mar 2008 07:20:49 -0000 Received: (qmail 19860 invoked by uid 22791); 22 Mar 2008 07:20:48 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from smtp-out.google.com (HELO smtp-out.google.com) (216.239.33.17) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Sat, 22 Mar 2008 07:20:17 +0000 Received: from zps77.corp.google.com (zps77.corp.google.com [172.25.146.77]) by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id m2M7K8eY022146 for ; Sat, 22 Mar 2008 07:20:09 GMT Received: from rv-out-0910.google.com (rvfc24.prod.google.com [10.140.180.24]) by zps77.corp.google.com with ESMTP id m2M7K7Fe017145 for ; Sat, 22 Mar 2008 00:20:07 -0700 Received: by rv-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id c24so904337rvf.42 for ; Sat, 22 Mar 2008 00:20:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.141.189.4 with SMTP id r4mr1676819rvp.98.1206170407348; Sat, 22 Mar 2008 00:20:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.141.113.18 with HTTP; Sat, 22 Mar 2008 00:20:07 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <2e7be40c0803220020h4acff8a1tf02402df6792c481@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 07:20:00 -0000 From: "Chris Demetriou" To: "Chris Demetriou" , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFA] fix for rbreak issue w/ "Junk at end of arguments" In-Reply-To: <2e7be40c0803220015h500b84fft723d595bfeb9888d@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <2e7be40c0803150118x58bf76c7r4bf67fc61d07c26a@mail.gmail.com> <20080321153206.GI25307@caradoc.them.org> <2e7be40c0803220015h500b84fft723d595bfeb9888d@mail.gmail.com> 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: 2008-03/txt/msg00328.txt.bz2 On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 8:32 AM, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > Thanks for fixing this. It's OK, modulo our whitespace conventions > (space before paren); I fixed that and checked it in. Ahh, how I've missed the GNU coding conventions. 8-) Thanks. > Want write access? > If so, fill out the sourceware.org form; it's on the front page of the > web site. Sure, why not. It's easier (for you all 8-) than having you apply patches for me. > Oddly the test doesn't fail for me even though I've got an > __libc_start_main@plt. It's not setting a breakpoint at the > PLT entry... boo, it thinks that comes from a startfile. Another day. Yeah. It seemed likely that this didn't fail in the same way for everybody -- otherwise I think a lot of people would have screamed by now, and it would have been fixed sooner. That's why I coded the test so that it didn't even *attempt* to verify a breakpoint on the @plt symbol on linux, and that's also why i verified that the issue existed on two different distro's. I don't have a system on which it did not fail previously, otherwise i probably would have investigated a bit further before submitting the patch. (Now that you have confirmed that the patch is reasonable, I don't really want to spend time investigating, of course. 8-) thanks, chris