From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2500 invoked by alias); 22 Sep 2003 20:11:42 -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 2492 invoked from network); 22 Sep 2003 20:11:41 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hawaii.kealia.com) (209.3.10.89) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 22 Sep 2003 20:11:41 -0000 Received: by hawaii.kealia.com (Postfix, from userid 2049) id 37016CB2E; Mon, 22 Sep 2003 13:11:41 -0700 (PDT) To: Jim Blandy Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: PATCH: correctly place new inclusions in includer's list References: From: David Carlton Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 20:11:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: (Jim Blandy's message of "22 Sep 2003 14:39:08 -0500") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.1002 (Gnus v5.10.2) XEmacs/21.4 (Rational FORTRAN, linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-SW-Source: 2003-09/txt/msg00480.txt.bz2 On 22 Sep 2003 14:39:08 -0500, Jim Blandy said: > David Carlton writes: >> I've seen macrotab seg faults intermittently over the last few >> months; I've been too lazy to track them down (they're hard to >> reproduce, and I didn't know if it was something weird about my >> branch or a bug in mainline), but if this patch might fix them, and >> if it's as trivial as it seems, then putting it in 6.0 makes sense >> to me. > It's hard to see how this would fix any seg faults. It just fixes > where in the list the traversal stops; but no matter where it stops, > the other loop conditions ensure that it stops in a structurally > valid state. > So I'd say the segfaults you've seen don't weigh for or against. Oh well. I'll keep my eye out for them (I haven't seen one in a little while) and see if I can find a way to reproduce them regularly (or fix them?), then. David Carlton carlton@kealia.com