From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jim Blandy To: Fernando Nasser Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Simple but crucial bug fix to gdb Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 13:55:00 -0000 Message-id: References: <3.0.5.32.20010530142745.01470ec0@pophost.pdxuxbre.lmc.com> <20010530173650.A21397@redhat.com> <3B15711D.BEA4B77E@cygnus.com> <3B1638A2.79AE4BCF@redhat.com> X-SW-Source: 2001-05/msg00509.html Fernando Nasser writes: > Irrelevant to the fact that his compiler may not be doing the right > thing, GDB should not be dumping core. That's absolutely true. > I sincerely expect that you provide us with the "more correct" fix asap. Please, don't be upset. I can't provide a more correct fix without understanding the user's situation more. I asked him a question in a message before the one I sent you, and I'm waiting to see what he says. Each partial symbol table object has an address range, textlow and texthigh, which is supposed to enclose all the functions it covers. If that address range is not set correctly, then GDB may not be able to find the full symbols for a given text address. The user has a stabs file which manages to get textlow_not_set cleared (indicating that pst->textlow has been set), while pst is zero. This is very curious --- if the pst is zero, which textlow was it that got set? There's something very odd (or, as Daniel would have me say, even odder than usual) going on here. Rather than slap a test for null over the problem and have it disappear, I want to try to understand what's going on. If you've got scurvy, you want limes, not spare teeth.