From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 42254 invoked by alias); 8 May 2015 10:47:19 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 42242 invoked by uid 89); 8 May 2015 10:47:18 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Fri, 08 May 2015 10:47:17 +0000 Received: from int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.26]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t48AlF88012441 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Fri, 8 May 2015 06:47:15 -0400 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.11]) by int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t48AlDNq013943; Fri, 8 May 2015 06:47:14 -0400 Message-ID: <554C9431.7080409@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 08 May 2015 10:47:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Doug Evans , gdb-patches Subject: Re: [RFC] When can we remove Sun-specific stabs support? (when will it be ok to delete partial_symtab.section_offsets?) References: <90e6ba6e87129285600515847ec6@google.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2015-05/txt/msg00181.txt.bz2 On 05/08/2015 12:04 AM, Doug Evans wrote: > So, assuming I'm not missing anything, we haven't supported > this hack for Sun stabs since 2003. > > Patch to delete it completely to follow, > unless there's a REALLY good reason to keep it. I don't know of a good reason to keep it. Given the results of your investigation, I'd say go ahead. Thanks, Pedro Alves