From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-return-19507-listarch-gdb=sources.redhat.com@sources.redhat.com>
Received: (qmail 7148 invoked by alias); 24 Sep 2004 06:36:23 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-subscribe@sources.redhat.com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb@sources.redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-help@sources.redhat.com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com
Received: (qmail 7118 invoked from network); 24 Sep 2004 06:36:21 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO walton.sibelius.xs4all.nl) (82.92.89.47)
  by sourceware.org with SMTP; 24 Sep 2004 06:36:21 -0000
Received: from elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl (elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl [192.168.0.2])
	by walton.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id i8O6aEQW020273;
	Fri, 24 Sep 2004 08:36:14 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.12.6p3/8.12.6) with ESMTP id i8O6ZqjL010382;
	Fri, 24 Sep 2004 08:35:52 +0200 (CEST)
	(envelope-from kettenis@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl)
Received: (from kettenis@localhost)
	by elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.12.6p3/8.12.6/Submit) id i8O6Zptk010379;
	Fri, 24 Sep 2004 08:35:51 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 06:36:00 -0000
Message-Id: <200409240635.i8O6Zptk010379@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl>
From: Mark Kettenis <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl>
To: amodra@bigpond.net.au
CC: binutils@sources.redhat.com, gdb@sources.redhat.com
In-reply-to: <20040924030920.GG30257@bubble.modra.org> (message from Alan
	Modra on Fri, 24 Sep 2004 12:39:20 +0930)
Subject: Re: elf.c assign_file_positions_for_segments
References: <200409231551.i8NFpHkJ025812@juw15.nfra.nl> <20040923234221.GE30257@bubble.modra.org> <20040924001757.GF30257@bubble.modra.org> <20040924030920.GG30257@bubble.modra.org>
X-SW-Source: 2004-09/txt/msg00213.txt.bz2

   Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 12:39:20 +0930
   From: Alan Modra <amodra@bigpond.net.au>

   On Fri, Sep 24, 2004 at 09:47:57AM +0930, Alan Modra wrote:
   > If we really don't need the SEC_HAS_CONTENTS test, then I'll take it out
   > and gdb gcore should be OK, otherwise I might ask you to clear
   > SEC_HAS_CONTENTS in gdb.

   I think it likely that the SEC_HAS_CONTENTS test is just a hack to work
   around another problem.  I'm applying the following to go back to the
   old behaviour.

Thanks.

   You might like to clear SEC_HAS_CONTENTS in gdb too, as it will result
   in needless file space being allocated.

I'll investigate this.  Can't say I completely understand what's
happening here, but I can always bother Michael Snyder with it, since
he wrote the initial gcore code.

Cheers,

Mark