Re: GDB 8.1.90 available for testing

[Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>]

> From: Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com>
> Date: Wed,  4 Jul 2018 09:22:02 -0700 (PDT)
> 
> I have just finished creating the gdb-8.1.90 pre-release.
> It is available for download at the following location:
> 
>     ftp://sourceware.org/pub/gdb/snapshots/branch/gdb-8.1.90.tar.xz
> 
> A gzip'ed version is also available: gdb-8.1.90.tar.gz.
> 
> Please give it a test if you can and report any problems you might find.

I've built this with mingw.org's MinGW.  I found one problem in
libiberty (which I will report separately), and I saw 3 warnings while
compiling GDB sources:

       CXX    infrun.o
     In file included from infrun.c:26:0:
     inferior.h: In function 'void handle_vfork_child_exec_or_exit(int)':
     inferior.h:533:39: warning: '*((void*)(& maybe_restore_inferior)+20).scoped_restore_current_inferior::m_saved_inf' may be used uninitialized in this function [-Wmaybe-uninitialized]
	{ set_current_inferior (m_saved_inf); }
					    ^
     infrun.c:929:6: note: '*((void*)(& maybe_restore_inferior)+20).scoped_restore_current_inferior::m_saved_inf' was declared here
	   maybe_restore_inferior;
	   ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
     In file included from inferior.h:49:0,
		      from infrun.c:26:
     progspace.h:285:47: warning: '*((void*)(& maybe_restore_inferior)+16).scoped_restore_current_program_space::m_saved_pspace' may be used uninitialized in this function [-Wmaybe-uninitialized]
	{ set_current_program_space (m_saved_pspace); }
						    ^
     infrun.c:929:6: note: '*((void*)(& maybe_restore_inferior)+16).scoped_restore_current_program_space::m_saved_pspace' was declared here
	   maybe_restore_inferior;
	   ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

   Same warnings were in GDB 8.1; ignored.

       CXX    symfile.o
     symfile.c: In function 'void set_objfile_default_section_offset(objfile*, const section_addr_info&, CORE_ADDR)':
     symfile.c:2114:14: warning: types may not be defined in a for-range-declaration
	for (const struct other_sections *objf_sect : objf_addrs_sorted)
		   ^~~~~~

The first two I saw in GDB 8.1 and reported back in January.  I
believe the conclusion was that we disregard these warnings?

But what about the 3rd one?

Other that that, the build went cleanly.  The new GDB binary, when
invoked on itself, reports the following DWARF-related issues:

     During symbol reading, unsupported tag: 'DW_TAG_unspecified_type'.
     During symbol reading, Member function "~_Sp_counted_base" (offset 0x3ef4f6) is virtual but the vtable offset is not specified.
     During symbol reading, cannot get low and high bounds for subprogram DIE at 0x409823.
     During symbol reading, cannot get low and high bounds for subprogram DIE at 0x409adc.
     During symbol reading, Member function "~probe" (offset 0x435e1c) is virtual but the vtable offset is not specified.
     During symbol reading, Child DIE 0x44114f and its abstract origin 0x446b8b have different parents.
     During symbol reading, Child DIE 0x4411cb and its abstract origin 0x446b8b have different parents.
     During symbol reading, No DW_FORM_block* DW_AT_call_value for DW_TAG_call_site child DIE 0x444e5c [in module d:\usr\eli\utils\gdb-8.1.90\gdb\gdb.exe].
     During symbol reading, No DW_FORM_block* DW_AT_call_value for DW_TAG_call_site child DIE 0x444ea3 [in module d:\usr\eli\utils\gdb-8.1.90\gdb\gdb.exe].
     During symbol reading, Multiple children of DIE 0x446df5 refer to DIE 0x446b0a as their abstract origin.
     During symbol reading, Multiple children of DIE 0x446e39 refer to DIE 0x446b0a as their abstract origin.

This is a '-O2 -gdwarf-4 -g3' build using GCC 6.3.0.  Is any of these
messages important?

Thanks.