On Tue, 23 Jul 2013 00:13:07 +0200, Mark Wielaard wrote:
Looks OK to me, but I haven't tried it.
Thanks for the review! Therefore going to check it in.
On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 09:21:55AM +0200, Jan Kratochvil wrote:
> 2013-07-22 Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil(a)redhat.com>
> * run-unstrip-n.sh (test-core.*): Ignore libc.so.6 entry and order of
> the entries.
I understand why you don't want to rely on the order of the entries.
BTW there could be maybe some sort-by-address postprocessing at the end of
dwfl_core_file_report in the future.
But why ignore the libc entry?
Because libc entry in the core file has no build-id and when also your on-disk
libc entry has no build-id it matches. But in such case the mapped length is
"random" - depending on your on-disk file.
Other possibility would be just to remove the mapped file length for