From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19043 invoked by alias); 23 Jul 2012 14:43:32 -0000 Received: (qmail 19028 invoked by uid 22791); 23 Jul 2012 14:43:30 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD 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, 23 Jul 2012 14:43:06 +0000 Received: from int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q6NEh5Eg031577 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 23 Jul 2012 10:43:05 -0400 Received: from barimba (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q6NEh4V3009719 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 23 Jul 2012 10:43:04 -0400 From: Tom Tromey To: "H.J. Lu" Cc: Jan Kratochvil , gdb-patches@sourceware.org, binutils@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [gdb commit] [RFC patch] non-release srctrees: --enable-targets=all & 64bit & -lmcheck References: <20120518211410.GA32107@host2.jankratochvil.net> <87396fqaf4.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <20120601182135.GA8348@host2.jankratochvil.net> Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2012 14:43:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: (H. J. Lu's message of "Fri, 20 Jul 2012 07:00:44 -0700") Message-ID: <87boj6sflz.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.1 (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: 2012-07/txt/msg00446.txt.bz2 HJ> http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14377 Please read comments #3 and #4 in the bug report. This patch may have exposed a latent bug; or it may be that the debuginfo in your program is incorrect. In any case it is unlikely that this problem is the direct result of this patch. Tom