From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4202 invoked by alias); 24 Sep 2004 19:12:59 -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 4192 invoked from network); 24 Sep 2004 19:12:58 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 24 Sep 2004 19:12:58 -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 i8OJCvwK005811 for ; Fri, 24 Sep 2004 15:12:58 -0400 Received: from localhost.redhat.com (porkchop.devel.redhat.com [172.16.58.2]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i8OJCvr04835; Fri, 24 Sep 2004 15:12:57 -0400 Received: from gnu.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B344B28D2; Fri, 24 Sep 2004 15:10:40 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <41547130.1060302@gnu.org> Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 19:12:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-GB; rv:1.4.1) Gecko/20040831 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Bryce McKinlay , Jim Blandy Cc: 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> <4147500F.6060101@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <4147500F.6060101@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2004-09/txt/msg00414.txt.bz2 > There were some test suite regressions with the patch. I didn't get a chance to investigate them, yet. So we don't loose this, would a simple testsuite addition be possible? Andrew > 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? >>> >>> >> > >