From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24016 invoked by alias); 25 Nov 2001 09:24:31 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.cygnus.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 23995 invoked from network); 25 Nov 2001 09:24:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO is.elta.co.il) (199.203.121.2) by sourceware.cygnus.com with SMTP; 25 Nov 2001 09:24:30 -0000 Received: (from eliz@localhost) by is.elta.co.il (8.9.3/8.8.8) id LAA04147; Sun, 25 Nov 2001 11:23:56 +0200 (IST) Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2001 08:27:00 -0000 From: Eli Zaretskii Message-Id: <200111250923.LAA04147@is.elta.co.il> To: jason@redhat.com CC: bkoz@redhat.com, libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org, gdb@sources.redhat.com In-reply-to: (message from Jason Merrill on Wed, 14 Nov 2001 16:02:11 +0000) Subject: Re: c++ debugging hosed Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii References: <200110291812.f9TICtQ10130@constant.com> X-SW-Source: 2001-11/txt/msg00127.txt.bz2 > From: Jason Merrill > Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2001 16:02:11 +0000 > > > --with-dwarf2: > > (gdb) p *this > > can't find class named `std::basic_filebuf >', as given by C++ RTTI > > > default: > > (gdb) p *this > > Attempt to take contents of a non-pointer value. > > > Sadly, this bug has been around for 2 weeks now. It's making debugging > > C++ code more difficult than it should be. Any hope for a quick fix? > > I just updated my gdb for the first time in months and ran into the same > problem. Looks like the V3 ABI support code isn't ready for prime time. > Until it is, you can disable it with this patch: > > *** gnu-v3-abi.c.~1~ Wed Nov 14 12:33:51 2001 > --- gnu-v3-abi.c Wed Nov 14 15:59:39 2001 > *************** init_gnuv3_ops (void) > *** 349,355 **** > --- 360,368 ---- > void > _initialize_gnu_v3_abi (void) > { > + #if 0 > init_gnuv3_ops (); > > register_cp_abi (gnu_v3_abi_ops); > + #endif > } The above code is in GDB 5.1, and it isn't disabled. I'm about to prepare a binary release of the DJGPP port, so I'd like to ask whether people here would recommend commenting defining away this code. Is this only a DWARF2 issue, or is the same problem relevant to stabs, say?