From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2900 invoked by alias); 28 May 2002 08:17:27 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 2870 invoked from network); 28 May 2002 08:17:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO branoic) (12.234.96.134) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 28 May 2002 08:17:25 -0000 Received: from drow by branoic with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 17CcA5-0001Q7-00; Tue, 28 May 2002 04:16:57 -0400 Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 01:17:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Carlo Wood Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: gdb bugs showing while working on libcwd Message-ID: <20020528081656.GB5390@branoic.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Carlo Wood , gdb@sources.redhat.com References: <20020523153816.A4454@alinoe.com> <20020524114149.A2793@redhat.com> <20020524184234.A22858@alinoe.com> <20020525033302.A20587@alinoe.com> <20020525014055.GA27211@branoic.them.org> <20020527034255.A25457@alinoe.com> <20020527060329.GA5078@branoic.them.org> <20020527144220.A16085@alinoe.com> <20020527180451.GA5523@branoic.them.org> <20020528020101.A12154@alinoe.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20020528020101.A12154@alinoe.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i X-SW-Source: 2002-05/txt/msg00302.txt.bz2 On Tue, May 28, 2002 at 02:01:01AM +0200, Carlo Wood wrote: > On Mon, May 27, 2002 at 02:04:51PM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > > mostly work. For some other operations, we try to behave correctly by > > using the symbol table constructed from debug information; it's in that > > latter case that we lose it. > > Is there any way I might help? What exactly is going wrong > in that latter case? > > Note that I wrote a demangler as well as a dwarf2 and stabs > debug symbols reader, so I might have some useful experience. Basically, we need to change how we store symbol information. It's not flexible to account for multiple namespaces. There's quite a bit in the archives about it if I recall correctly... By the way, if that includes a v3 demangler - there are three failures in the demangler testsuite on v3 for functions taking function pointers that I can't wrap my head around... :) -- Daniel Jacobowitz Carnegie Mellon University MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer