From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 449 invoked by alias); 17 Jan 2003 19:56:34 -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 424 invoked from network); 17 Jan 2003 19:56:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO crack.them.org) (65.125.64.184) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 17 Jan 2003 19:56:33 -0000 Received: from nevyn.them.org ([66.93.61.169] ident=mail) by crack.them.org with asmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 18ZeUG-0000Q4-00 for ; Fri, 17 Jan 2003 15:57:16 -0600 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18ZcbU-0003Uj-00 for ; Fri, 17 Jan 2003 14:56:36 -0500 Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 19:56:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: gdb Subject: Re: GDB DWARF-1 C++ support Message-ID: <20030117195635.GA13418@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: gdb References: <200301171928.h0HJS8805276@duracef.shout.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i X-SW-Source: 2003-01/txt/msg00323.txt.bz2 On Fri, Jan 17, 2003 at 11:54:59AM -0800, David Carlton wrote: > [ I've retitled this bit of the thread and moved it to gdb@. ] > > On Fri, 17 Jan 2003 13:28:08 -0600, Michael Elizabeth Chastain said: > > > Here is what I want to do about gdb DWARF-1 C++ support: > > > make a policy decision whether gdb supports DWARF-1 with C++ > > > if yes: > > remove all the setup_xfail_format DWARF-1 calls > > add regular DWARF-1 testing > > file about 50 new PR's for all the new FAIL's > > file PR's against gcc for the external bugs (and they will hate us) > > > if no: > > document that gdb supports C++ with DWARF-2 or stabs+ but not DWARF-1 > > add a DWARF-1 check to "skip_cplus_tests" > > remove all the setup_xfail_format DWARF-1 calls > > Yup. I'm not familiar with DWARF-1, so conceivably it's possible > that we want to support C++ DWARF-1 debugging but that DWARF-1 is by > nature incapable of supporting the full range of C++ features, in > which case we'd only skip certain C++ tests under DWARF-1. But I'm > really not worried about that possibility for now. > > Anyways, my kneejerk reaction is that no, we shouldn't support it: I > have a hard time imagining a scenario where it would be a profitable > use of resources to work on supporting DWARF-1. What platforms use it > as their native debugging format? What C++ compilers run on those > platforms? I believe no recent version of GCC uses DWARF-1 that does not also support DWARF-2. We support oddball C compilers, but not oddball C++ compilers, in general. -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer