From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2113 invoked by alias); 4 Aug 2009 14:55:28 -0000 Received: (qmail 2103 invoked by uid 22791); 4 Aug 2009 14:55:27 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from NaN.false.org (HELO nan.false.org) (208.75.86.248) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 04 Aug 2009 14:55:21 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C43E410ACE; Tue, 4 Aug 2009 14:55:19 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (209.195.188.212.nauticom.net [209.195.188.212]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF807108C6; Tue, 4 Aug 2009 14:55:19 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1MYLQ6-0008LC-V6; Tue, 04 Aug 2009 10:55:18 -0400 Date: Tue, 04 Aug 2009 14:55:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Jonas Maebe Cc: gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: errors in GDB reading symbols Message-ID: <20090804145518.GB31664@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Jonas Maebe , gdb@sourceware.org References: <97234C41-9CA5-4A2C-89BA-6B54256D8B81@gmail.com> <20090803170138.GA32482@caradoc.them.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2009-08/txt/msg00014.txt.bz2 On Tue, Aug 04, 2009 at 04:52:04PM +0200, Jonas Maebe wrote: > Yes, I also forwarded Daniel's original message to the Free Pascal > core list. I'm a member of the Free Pascal core development team, but > not in the camp that favours writing a complete alternative debugger > (although I really would appreciate it if someone could integrate the > GDB patches I submit, because even after pinging twice > http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2009-06/msg00273.html still > appears to be in limbo). Sorry - no matter what, I expect we'll always lose patches, but the situation is much better than it's been in my memory. Could you resend that? -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery