From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9058 invoked by alias); 18 Jul 2003 16:46:20 -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 9051 invoked from network); 18 Jul 2003 16:46:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 18 Jul 2003 16:46:20 -0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 19dYN2-00055m-00; Fri, 18 Jul 2003 12:46:12 -0400 Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2003 16:46:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: David Carlton Cc: tromey@redhat.com, gdb , Mark Kettenis Subject: Re: GDB and Java Message-ID: <20030718164612.GA19486@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: David Carlton , tromey@redhat.com, gdb , Mark Kettenis References: <87smp3esha.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <87fzl3er3t.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> 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: 2003-07/txt/msg00255.txt.bz2 On Fri, Jul 18, 2003 at 09:43:48AM -0700, David Carlton wrote: > On 18 Jul 2003 10:28:54 -0600, Tom Tromey said: > > > Ok, I've tried cvs head today. I'm debugging a large java application > > that consists of about 90 shared libraries (not including libgcj). > > > I can consistently make gdb crash like this: > > > ../../src/gdb/dwarf2-frame.c:1032: internal-error: sect_index_text not initialized > > A problem internal to GDB has been detected, > > further debugging may prove unreliable. > > This is probably the same unfortunate interaction between anonymous > objfiles and the new DWARF 2 frame stuff that Daniel noted in > conjunction with another patch of mine. I think > is > supposed to cure it, so give that a try. Is that patch, or a variant, > supposed to go into 6.0? This argues that it had better go in. I'm not sure if it's for the same issue or not, but that patch definitely fixes Cygwin. Mark, everyone seems happy with that patch; would you check it in on both branches? -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer