From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca by simark.ca with LMTP id YGeIHifEq2DbXAAAWB0awg (envelope-from ) for ; Mon, 24 May 2021 11:20:07 -0400 Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id 75EF91F11C; Mon, 24 May 2021 11:20:07 -0400 (EDT) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on simark.ca X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.5 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RDNS_DYNAMIC,T_DKIM_INVALID,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from sourceware.org (ip-8-43-85-97.sourceware.org [8.43.85.97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CB9911E01F for ; Mon, 24 May 2021 11:20:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91163385802A; Mon, 24 May 2021 15:20:06 +0000 (GMT) Received: from gateway34.websitewelcome.com (gateway34.websitewelcome.com [192.185.148.200]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A4F443858022 for ; Mon, 24 May 2021 15:20:04 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org A4F443858022 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=tromey.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=tom@tromey.com Received: from cm11.websitewelcome.com (cm11.websitewelcome.com [100.42.49.5]) by gateway34.websitewelcome.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3AA915CF25 for ; Mon, 24 May 2021 10:20:02 -0500 (CDT) Received: from box5379.bluehost.com ([162.241.216.53]) by cmsmtp with SMTP id lCN8l5TWMnrr4lCN8lzYBb; Mon, 24 May 2021 10:20:02 -0500 X-Authority-Reason: nr=8 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tromey.com; s=default; h=Content-Type:MIME-Version:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:Date:References :Subject:Cc:To:From:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=JG0BfdsHYDenshS4SjJlyynriu6EQ5tlHcT3Hj46x4M=; b=Hftc9qKdgNiBqt3WsU+h6OUOsM ieIBsAN3Z8xTSYriJYF5cxuhnHv3V1heXdDMI4W9NlUb4YG4apH13TdCNUUcsH+599I27HpbYNnrD sOrFSnjwQdvINHySt9LBfu+R2; Received: from 75-166-134-27.hlrn.qwest.net ([75.166.134.27]:47158 helo=murgatroyd) by box5379.bluehost.com with esmtpsa (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1llCN7-004Luc-Ua; Mon, 24 May 2021 09:20:01 -0600 From: Tom Tromey To: Tom de Vries Subject: Re: [PATCH][gdb/breakpoint] Fix assert in jit_event_handler References: <20210520152938.GA31635@delia> X-Attribution: Tom Date: Mon, 24 May 2021 09:20:01 -0600 In-Reply-To: (Tom de Vries's message of "Fri, 21 May 2021 13:27:55 +0200") Message-ID: <87wnrow44e.fsf@tromey.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - box5379.bluehost.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - sourceware.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - tromey.com X-BWhitelist: no X-Source-IP: 75.166.134.27 X-Source-L: No X-Exim-ID: 1llCN7-004Luc-Ua X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: X-Source-Sender: 75-166-134-27.hlrn.qwest.net (murgatroyd) [75.166.134.27]:47158 X-Source-Auth: tom+tromey.com X-Email-Count: 5 X-Source-Cap: ZWx5bnJvYmk7ZWx5bnJvYmk7Ym94NTM3OS5ibHVlaG9zdC5jb20= X-Local-Domain: yes X-BeenThere: gdb-patches@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Errors-To: gdb-patches-bounces@sourceware.org Sender: "Gdb-patches" >>>>> "Tom" == Tom de Vries writes: Simon> It's quite annoying that separate debug info files are represented by Simon> "objfile"s... Tom> Yeah, indeed. Tom> And you could even say that that's fine, but question whether they Tom> should be in the objfiles list, that is, have the default behaviour of: I've long thought this was a design error, and that having the separate debug objfile be replaced with supplementary BFDs attached to the main objfile would be a better design. If someone wants to implement this, I'm all for it. Tom