From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 1730 invoked by alias); 19 Nov 2012 16:28:04 -0000 Received: (qmail 1602 invoked by uid 22791); 19 Nov 2012 16:28:00 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 19 Nov 2012 16:27:25 +0000 Received: from int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id qAJGRORL003291 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 19 Nov 2012 11:27:24 -0500 Received: from barimba (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id qAJFU7wG009192 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 19 Nov 2012 10:30:15 -0500 From: Tom Tromey To: David Albert Cc: gdb-patches Subject: Re: [PATCH] Scan for Mach-O start address in LC_MAIN and properly check bfd_mach_o_scan_start_address's return value References: Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2012 16:28:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: (David Albert's message of "Sun, 18 Nov 2012 23:13:21 -0500") Message-ID: <874nklsj9d.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain 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: 2012-11/txt/msg00509.txt.bz2 >>>>> "David" == David Albert writes: David> - I didn't run the test suite because it wasn't clear what parts of David> the suite I should run. I tested it manually and didn't find any David> regressions. Unfortunately, what you have to do is run the entire test suite before and after your change, and verify that there were no regressions or dropped tests. Also you have to know that some tests fail spuriously -- I guess you could post a list of differences and someone could advise. Tom