This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [PATCH RFA?] solib.c hack
- To: Andrew Cagney <ac131313 at cygnus dot com>
- Subject: Re: [PATCH RFA?] solib.c hack
- From: Kevin Buettner <kevinb at cygnus dot com>
- Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 08:11:17 -0700
- Cc: gdb-patches at sourceware dot cygnus dot com
- References: <1000918175700.ZM29948@ocotillo.lan> <39F6E48F.BD5F1BF4@cygnus.com>
On Oct 26, 12:47am, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> > I found that the following hack was needed for to get gdb to run a
> > program on i586-sco-sysv5uw7.1.0. It seems to me that the real
> > problem could be in the toolchain which generated the executable, but
> > I also think that it's not unreasonable to place a limit on the value
> > that ``storage_needed'' can take on.
> >
> > Okay to apply?
> >
> > (I have misgivings about this patch myself, so I'll understand if it's
> > rejected.)
>
> Its really a shared library maintainer question however, shouldn't BFD
> be the thing that is responsible for ensuring that the value returned is
> correct? Now a days 6mb isn't that much.
Yeah. Michael Snyder had the same observation regarding BFD returning
the correct value.
I withdraw this patch from consideration.
Kevin