From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21297 invoked by alias); 9 May 2012 20:15:58 -0000 Received: (qmail 21286 invoked by uid 22791); 9 May 2012 20:15:55 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_PASS,TW_BJ,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; Wed, 09 May 2012 20:15:37 +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 q49KFF38003809 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 9 May 2012 16:15:15 -0400 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 q49KFEjE030628 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 9 May 2012 16:15:14 -0400 From: Tom Tromey To: Joel Brobecker Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [RFA] choose symbol from given block's objfile first. References: <1336430581-11262-1-git-send-email-brobecker@adacore.com> <874nrqvbeh.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <20120509190529.GI15555@adacore.com> <20120509190753.GA31769@adacore.com> Date: Wed, 09 May 2012 20:15:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20120509190753.GA31769@adacore.com> (Joel Brobecker's message of "Wed, 9 May 2012 12:07:53 -0700") Message-ID: <87ehqtru0d.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.95 (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: 2012-05/txt/msg00313.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Joel" == Joel Brobecker writes: Joel> Attached are two patches, the first being the code change, and the Joel> second a testcase for it. It looks reasonable to me, but I wonder whether it is complete. That is -- there are a lot of uses of ALL_OBJFILES; I wonder whether any of them need updating. Tom