[patch/rebase] Add a rebase database to keep track of DLL addresses

[Charles Wilson]

On 7/24/2011 3:16 PM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Jul 24 14:09, Charles Wilson wrote:
>> but read is returning 0
> 
> Ouch, ouch, ouch!  Why didn't you say that in your first mail?

'Cause I didn't know, then, FOR SURE, that it was actually returning 0.
 All I knew was that (a) it *wasn't* returning negative, and (b) no
bytes were being written into array[i].name.  That's pretty strong
circumstantial evidence that read() was returning zero...but not PROOF.

Now I know, because I removed O_BINARY, and rearranged the 'if'
statement so I could explicitly check the actual value that read() is
returning in this case.

>  Ignoring
> 0 == EOF is a blatant bug in my loader code.
> 
> Wait with your patch, please.  First I'll add the early-EOF handling.

Oops.  Well, adapting to whatever you change with regards to read() is
easy, compared to all the /other/ changes I had to make to the patch in
response to the review comments.  So, go ahead with whatever you need to
do, and I'll publish round 3.

--
Chuck