From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca by simark.ca with LMTP id 8CqZAJmA82Ps9zgAWB0awg (envelope-from ) for ; Mon, 20 Feb 2023 09:15:53 -0500 Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id F2E201E222; Mon, 20 Feb 2023 09:15:52 -0500 (EST) Authentication-Results: simark.ca; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; secure) header.d=sourceware.org header.i=@sourceware.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=default header.b=lu9mwjYj; dkim-atps=neutral X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on simark.ca X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, RDNS_DYNAMIC,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 Received: from sourceware.org (ip-8-43-85-97.sourceware.org [8.43.85.97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 960551E110 for ; Mon, 20 Feb 2023 09:15:52 -0500 (EST) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47495383FB88 for ; Mon, 20 Feb 2023 14:15:52 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 47495383FB88 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1676902552; bh=mtq0Jdhpiq+J7MeQx4ikrRbwsBUuKpTRDfQzWuDc41Q=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:List-Id: List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe: From:Reply-To:From; b=lu9mwjYjvwxkC/gdSnshMR17fDxAfS56OgDhYAkb+8y/SPPOcNsSWhqVu5j7dseCU 9meuG8fE3uJBFYdkpE1tp32I3m6Sjlh36FVDgwOSAP6z295ORmqIr4uo+DqCQFsfEN LRvBkGRamJATLAPAgDQIdyadmiobdmo21K2SE0cI= Received: from mout-p-101.mailbox.org (mout-p-101.mailbox.org [IPv6:2001:67c:2050:0:465::101]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2EC3D383FE3E for ; Mon, 20 Feb 2023 14:14:38 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 2EC3D383FE3E Received: from smtp102.mailbox.org (smtp102.mailbox.org [10.196.197.102]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-384) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mout-p-101.mailbox.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4PL4DV4wpfz9sTs; Mon, 20 Feb 2023 15:14:34 +0100 (CET) Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2023 15:14:31 +0100 Subject: Re: [RFC] [gdb/testsuite] Use dwarf assembly in gdb.dlang/dlang-start.exp To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Tom de Vries Cc: Tom Tromey References: <20230220134839.1944-1-tdevries@suse.de> In-Reply-To: <20230220134839.1944-1-tdevries@suse.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <1676902127.35r1n62kps.astroid@pulse.none> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-BeenThere: gdb-patches@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , From: Iain Buclaw via Gdb-patches Reply-To: Iain Buclaw Errors-To: gdb-patches-bounces+public-inbox=simark.ca@sourceware.org Sender: "Gdb-patches" Excerpts from Tom de Vries via Gdb-patches's message of Februar 20, 2023 2:= 48 pm: > For test-case gdb.dlang/dlang-start.exp, I run into: > ... > gdb compile failed, default_target_compile: Can't find gdc. > ... >=20 > AFAICT, my distro has no support for gdc, but I'd like to have the test-c= ase > running and passing, so let's rewrite the test-case using dwarf assembly > (though arguably, it's not a bad idea to have test-cases excercising > actual compilers). >=20 > My distro does have a package providing dmd, so let's try out simple.d > compiled with dmd, and investigate what the start command does. >=20 I'm pretty sure I'd get testsuite failures for not having Ada or Rust installed either. Shouldn't the testsuite just return UNSUPPORTED when there's a missing dependency? > AFAICT, gdb uses "D main" because the minimal symbol _Dmain: > ... > $ nm simple | grep 438448 > 0000000000438448 t > 0000000000438448 W _Dmain > ... > is demangled into "D main": > ... Yes. If I try to second guess my thinking from 2016 or so. I believe it was because "_Dmain" could come from any language, but having a space in the identifier pretty much guarantees only a D compiler generated it. Iain.