From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 30958 invoked by alias); 21 Mar 2002 18:00:16 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 30906 invoked from network); 21 Mar 2002 18:00:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO zwingli.cygnus.com) (208.245.165.35) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 21 Mar 2002 18:00:11 -0000 Received: by zwingli.cygnus.com (Postfix, from userid 442) id 0D14B5EA11; Thu, 21 Mar 2002 13:00:09 -0500 (EST) To: Andrew Cagney Cc: Daniel Jacobowitz , fnf@redhat.com, Mark Kettenis , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFA/stabs] Fix for line table problems (was: Re: [RFC] Gdb line table implementation tweak) References: <200202272320.g1RNK5e14347@fishpond.ninemoons.com> <20020317014816.B1589@nevyn.them.org> <3C98F14B.7040504@cygnus.com> From: Jim Blandy Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2002 10:00:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <3C98F14B.7040504@cygnus.com> Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-SW-Source: 2002-03/txt/msg00408.txt.bz2 Andrew Cagney writes: > > [This is long. Feel free to skip to the patch at the very end, and > > stop to take a gander at the testsuite numbers in the middle :)] > > On Wed, Feb 27, 2002 at 04:20:05PM -0700, Fred Fish wrote: > > > >> > Fred, could you look into these failures? > > > >> Yes, but I would need access to a host system that exhibits > >> the failures. Given a pointer and access to such a system, > >> I can try and see what is going on. > > I've got it. It's almost exactly like the bug I fixed in binutils > > addr2line a few hours ago. We do not have an N_SLINE at the beginning > > of the function. Our starting lines for functions have, as a result, > > always been a little odd... > > Jim, would you be able to bump this one up a bit on your things to do > list? I believe it addresses the regressions MichaelC detected just > prior to 5.2 being branched and is on the high priority list. Yes, I've been sort of panicing this week, but I think this might be valuable to the project I'm currenty panicing about. I'll probably get to it today.