From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 88320 invoked by alias); 1 Jun 2018 18:55:07 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 88303 invoked by uid 89); 1 Jun 2018 18:55:07 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=Hx-languages-length:569, H*f:sk:2018050, UD:dbxread.c, dbxread.c X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Fri, 01 Jun 2018 18:55:06 +0000 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.24]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3C61F30B950D; Fri, 1 Jun 2018 18:55:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from theo.uglyboxes.com (ovpn04.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.4]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F122B308BDA6; Fri, 1 Jun 2018 18:55:04 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [RFA 1/6] Remove dead code in end_psymtab To: Tom Tromey , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <20180503223621.22544-1-tom@tromey.com> <20180503223621.22544-2-tom@tromey.com> From: Keith Seitz Message-ID: Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2018 18:55:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.5.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20180503223621.22544-2-tom@tromey.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2018-06/txt/msg00030.txt.bz2 On 05/03/2018 03:36 PM, Tom Tromey wrote: > Normally I would investigate a fix for the code. However, considering > that the code has been this way a long time (since the first import to > sourceware) and considering that dbxread.c is not as important any > more, I think it's safe to just consider that there's no bug. I agree. If it's not tested and the comments aren't clear about what problem it is trying to solve, wait for a new bug report. :-) IANAMBLGTM* Keith * "I am not a maintainer, but looks good to me."