From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 1886 invoked by alias); 15 Mar 2012 16:51:20 -0000 Received: (qmail 1872 invoked by uid 22791); 15 Mar 2012 16:51:18 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail-ey0-f169.google.com (HELO mail-ey0-f169.google.com) (209.85.215.169) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 15 Mar 2012 16:51:05 +0000 Received: by eaal1 with SMTP id l1so1951284eaa.0 for ; Thu, 15 Mar 2012 09:51:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:x-system-of-record :x-gm-message-state; bh=E0+JVios4Ryoq7FCu4bCUasBQmL46Id8Gj7Hfw0wg7s=; b=jDzQBaUEdS75iO+bM347BQ0odgn7l2zF8nZZybWDkiEuCkryl+I16L7q9SbPWkaK1+ +vxx9lMVPgF5S8A7XkRPdDNNqE7AUIqCxaQ3Yel6MR3PFG99pf5K1b3Ip2NMDXvzPNfQ LpHGL1pmDikb+c6Fna75+wL+3zHnTjXkEWCywQFiVrZyjp2MeBCmML6HoXDkbrgjE+7/ HxCGL0ZlIyk61/tfLLNptdYaVLZIYe3f4bzudlsmGYjh5O5zkg6D+rELHfwy0MfKDBfZ Dcj3B7/0k3BG1j9UO34a/ASUY2H+RaujV0ShkHJ3vmEYt66MTqzUtlF2fV+3TicRXqth AdbA== Received: by 10.52.240.161 with SMTP id wb1mr5182764vdc.20.1331830263298; Thu, 15 Mar 2012 09:51:03 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.52.240.161 with SMTP id wb1mr5182746vdc.20.1331830263094; Thu, 15 Mar 2012 09:51:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.220.187.12 with HTTP; Thu, 15 Mar 2012 09:51:03 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20120315105117.GA3076@redhat.com> References: <20120314133746.GA5696@redhat.com> <20120314175451.GA20072@host2.jankratochvil.net> <20120315105117.GA3076@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2012 16:51:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFA take 6] Allow setting breakpoints on inline functions (PR 10738) From: Doug Evans To: Doug Evans , Jan Kratochvil , gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Eli Zaretskii , Mark Wielaard Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-System-Of-Record: true X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkCav9FyqQJWfyNVm9ttMk5SIaqM9lNU6c7rajF+co/DReTcgsc2yqeTsNlYiCDXirnQNQttU/D0YDhF/Aen2ksKMqnqjqqEL7uS98nDb2cZUGVLEL3rd5/xDaNXknZZJmSlr5PzoL7hc1aOkxRqN+Hux+ZLg== X-IsSubscribed: yes 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: 2012-03/txt/msg00550.txt.bz2 On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 3:51 AM, Gary Benson wrote: > Jan, Doug, Eli, how do you feel about "possibly inconsistent"? > > The option text would become: > > "Do not reject possibly inconsistent .gdb_index sections." > > and the docs would be s/incomplete/possibly inconsistent/ > > Warnings would be: > =A0versions < 4: "Skipping obsolete .gdb-index section in %s" > =A0versions 4,5: "Skipping possibly inconsistent .gdb_index section in %s, > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 pass --use-old-index-sections to use them= anyway" > > Does that look ok? ok