From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10616 invoked by alias); 19 Sep 2003 14:04:21 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 10609 invoked from network); 19 Sep 2003 14:04:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO trdlnk.com) (208.252.163.7) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 19 Sep 2003 14:04:20 -0000 Received: from trdlnk.com (cobb [10.10.2.129]) by trdlnk.com (8.12.9+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h8JE4Bg3018444; Fri, 19 Sep 2003 09:04:11 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: <3F6B0CDB.1010102@trdlnk.com> Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 14:04:00 -0000 From: "Neal E. Coombes" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; SunOS i86pc; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030630 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jim Blandy CC: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: dbxread.c:1771: internal-error: sect_index_data not initialized References: <3F687799.5050201@trdlnk.com> <3F68A535.8010609@redhat.com> <3F68C117.3010007@trdlnk.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2003-09/txt/msg00236.txt.bz2 Jim Blandy wrote: > > Unfortunately, this revision isn't right. > > Falling back to the .bss section's offset when no .data offset is > available makes sense (sort of) when we're not really sure which > section contains the object whose address we're relocating. If there > is no .data section, the object certainly isn't there, so it's a > decent guess that it belongs in .bss. > > But there are other cases where we know for sure that the symbol is in > the .data section, not the .bss section. In those cases, if we have > no .data section offset, then GDB is in an inconsistent state, and > should crash. It's not correct to fall back to the .bss section. Thanks for the explanation. I'll pass it on to my co-worker and rebuild our gdb! Neal