From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Fernando Nasser To: Elena Zannoni Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, hilfingr@otisco.mckusick.com Subject: Re: RFA: [symfile.c} Fix to symbol_file_add() [REPOST] Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 11:06:00 -0000 Message-id: <3AF04C43.862221AB@redhat.com> References: <3AED8391.C6B9A456@redhat.com> <15085.43538.55216.581538@kwikemart.cygnus.com> <3AEDF6A3.440D0C62@redhat.com> <15086.11696.278572.217415@kwikemart.cygnus.com> <3AEEB0E2.3232D2DE@redhat.com> <15087.31793.429533.289522@kwikemart.cygnus.com> <3AF02D6E.333B2AAB@redhat.com> <15088.12423.711167.908434@kwikemart.cygnus.com> <3AF038C1.A4B357E1@redhat.com> <15088.17227.259910.66222@kwikemart.cygnus.com> X-SW-Source: 2001-05/msg00014.html Elena Zannoni wrote: > > Fernando Nasser writes: > > Elena Zannoni wrote: > > > > > > Thanks Fernando! > > > But shouldn't we be leaving the stuff in symbol_file_command? > > > I.e. only adding it to the new function? > > > > > > > Yes, of course. It calls symbol_file_add(), not symbol_file_add_main() > > because of the flags. Silly me. > > > > Yes, please consider the patch without the removal part. > > Ok, sure. Check it in. Just for completion can you post the final > diff once you are done? > Absolutely. > Thanks > Elena > > > > > P.S.: I guess symbol_file_add_main() should have the flags argument, > > but I guess this thing has been going on for too long now for me to go > > after all callers and add the argument. > > Add a FIXME/comment. > Good idea. Thank you for all your help. P.S.: I will have to do all this tomorrow afternoon as I have to prepare a presentation. -- Fernando Nasser Red Hat Canada Ltd. E-Mail: fnasser@redhat.com 2323 Yonge Street, Suite #300 Toronto, Ontario M4P 2C9