From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5894 invoked by alias); 24 Mar 2009 01:45:42 -0000 Received: (qmail 5880 invoked by uid 22791); 24 Mar 2009 01:45:41 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from nschwmtas02p.mx.bigpond.com (HELO nschwmtas02p.mx.bigpond.com) (61.9.189.140) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 24 Mar 2009 01:45:35 +0000 Received: from nschwotgx03p.mx.bigpond.com ([121.209.33.16]) by nschwmtas02p.mx.bigpond.com with ESMTP id <20090324014526.IDBI5488.nschwmtas02p.mx.bigpond.com@nschwotgx03p.mx.bigpond.com>; Tue, 24 Mar 2009 01:45:26 +0000 Received: from bubble.grove.modra.org ([121.209.33.16]) by nschwotgx03p.mx.bigpond.com with ESMTP id <20090324014523.JSRW551.nschwotgx03p.mx.bigpond.com@bubble.grove.modra.org>; Tue, 24 Mar 2009 01:45:23 +0000 Received: by bubble.grove.modra.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id B645B170C391; Tue, 24 Mar 2009 12:15:22 +1030 (CST) Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 01:45:00 -0000 From: Alan Modra To: Hans-Peter Nilsson Cc: drow@false.org, binutils@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [RFA:] In bfd_assert at the end, call _exit (EXIT_FAILURE) Message-ID: <20090324014522.GD30645@bubble.grove.modra.org> Mail-Followup-To: Hans-Peter Nilsson , drow@false.org, binutils@sourceware.org References: <20090323145608.GA1886@caradoc.them.org> <200903231524.n2NFOV18027354@ignucius.se.axis.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200903231524.n2NFOV18027354@ignucius.se.axis.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17+20080114 (2008-01-14) X-RPD-ScanID: Class unknown; VirusThreatLevel unknown, RefID str=0001.0A150203.49C83B33.0089,ss=1,fgs=0 X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact binutils-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: binutils-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2009-03/txt/msg00436.txt.bz2 Why have bfd_assert if it behaves like _bfd_abort? I'd rather see occurrences of BFD_ASSERT changed to calls to abort, if so doing makes sense on a case by case basis. -- Alan Modra Australia Development Lab, IBM