From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-72379-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 11178 invoked by alias); 21 Apr 2010 20:03:23 -0000
Received: (qmail 11116 invoked by uid 22791); 21 Apr 2010 20:03:21 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.9 required=5.0 	tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28)     by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 21 Apr 2010 20:03:15 +0000
Received: from int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11]) 	by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o3LK3D89030803 	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) 	for <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>; Wed, 21 Apr 2010 16:03:13 -0400
Received: from ns3.rdu.redhat.com (ns3.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.255.199]) 	by int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o3LK3DZX026867; 	Wed, 21 Apr 2010 16:03:13 -0400
Received: from opsy.redhat.com (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) 	by ns3.rdu.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o3LK3CnK010725; 	Wed, 21 Apr 2010 16:03:12 -0400
Received: by opsy.redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 500) 	id 9817737817D; Wed, 21 Apr 2010 14:03:11 -0600 (MDT)
From: Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com>
To: Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com>
Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [patch] Fix separate-debug with non-unique section names (PR    11409)
References: <20100323205655.GA12124@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> 	<m339zpk0gg.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> 	<20100324200943.GA12225@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> 	<20100324201825.GA31992@caradoc.them.org> 	<20100324203252.GA17319@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> 	<m3634lihgx.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> 	<20100325145913.GA26968@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> 	<m3ocicdve7.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> 	<20100325203846.GA27212@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net>
Reply-To: tromey@redhat.com
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2010 20:03:00 -0000
In-Reply-To: <20100325203846.GA27212@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> (Jan 	Kratochvil's message of "Thu, 25 Mar 2010 21:38:46 +0100")
Message-ID: <m3633ka800.fsf@fleche.redhat.com>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb-patches.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2010-04/txt/msg00698.txt.bz2

>>>>> "Jan" == Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com> writes:

Jan> Now the question remains what to use for gdb_7_1-branch as it fixes
Jan> a regression (by me) from gdb-7.0 as described in the first mail:
Jan> 	http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2010-03/msg00799.html

Jan> I would even suggest the first simple variant of the patch from that mail.

Was there ever an answer to this?
I think the simple variant is probably safe enough.  In any case it is
an improvement.

Tom