From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28131 invoked by alias); 14 Sep 2004 20:09:58 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 28124 invoked from network); 14 Sep 2004 20:09:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 14 Sep 2004 20:09:57 -0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.12.11/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i8EK9vdJ024444 for ; Tue, 14 Sep 2004 16:09:57 -0400 Received: from pobox.toronto.redhat.com (pobox.toronto.redhat.com [172.16.14.4]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i8EK9qr01544; Tue, 14 Sep 2004 16:09:52 -0400 Received: from [172.16.14.67] (towel.toronto.redhat.com [172.16.14.67]) by pobox.toronto.redhat.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id i8EK9p1l012419; Tue, 14 Sep 2004 16:09:52 -0400 Message-ID: <4147500F.6060101@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2004 20:09:00 -0000 From: Bryce McKinlay User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.5 (X11/20040626) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andrew Cagney CC: Jim Blandy , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Patch: Handle relative paths in .debug_line References: <41004E5D.5020403@redhat.com> <4101A540.5050208@redhat.com> <4109641D.7090301@redhat.com> <41474B98.4070601@gnu.org> In-Reply-To: <41474B98.4070601@gnu.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2004-09/txt/msg00235.txt.bz2 There were some test suite regressions with the patch. I didn't get a chance to investigate them, yet. Bryce Andrew Cagney wrote: > Did this get closed / committed? > >> Bryce McKinlay writes: >> >>>> Jim Blandy wrote: >>> >>> >>>>> >Almost --- dwarf2_start_subfile still passes comp_dir to concat >>>>> >without checking whether it's NULL. >>>>> > >>>> >>> >>>> Fixed in the following patch. OK? >>> >> >> >> Looks better! >> >> You've done before-and-after runs of the test suite, right? If there >> are no regressions there, please feel free to commit. >> Are there any tests currently in the test suite that catch this bug? >> >> >