This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the GDB project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
"Elena Zannoni" <ezannoni@redhat.com> wrote in message news:16012.44364.781796.157557@localhost.redhat.com... > Raoul Gough writes: [snip] > > The attached exmple shows the problem in action and the attached diffs > > fix both problems. Do these changes seem sensible to others? > > I am not a coff expert, but the change seems sensible. > See below for a typo. > Did you run the gdb testsuite with your patch and w/o? Any differences? I've checked my coffread.c patches against the testsuite, without finding any regressions under Cygwin or Linux (not COFF based, so there wouldn't be any changes expected, of course). I've also written a new testsuite script that demonstrates the problem and tests the fix. I've added the script as a note to PR 1132 in GNATS (see http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-prs/2003-q2/msg00129.html). I've attached an updated diff to this posting with a fix for the typo that Elena identified. Any advice on getting these patches checked in and the PR closed? I can't do it myself, since I don't have any write access. Regards, Raoul Gough
Attachment:
coffread.c.diff.txt
Description: Text document
Attachment:
ChangeLog_entry.txt
Description: Text document
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |