From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28505 invoked by alias); 5 May 2004 05:24:51 -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 28498 invoked from network); 5 May 2004 05:24:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO granger.mail.mindspring.net) (207.69.200.148) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 5 May 2004 05:24:51 -0000 Received: from user-119a90a.biz.mindspring.com ([66.149.36.10] helo=berman.michael-chastain.com) by granger.mail.mindspring.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 1BLEsM-00084G-00; Wed, 05 May 2004 01:23:22 -0400 Received: by berman.michael-chastain.com (Postfix, from userid 502) id A2AF64B104; Wed, 5 May 2004 01:23:10 -0400 (EDT) To: cagney@gnu.org, mec.gnu@mindspring.com Subject: Re: Phasing out Dwarf 1? Cc: ezannoni@redhat.com, gdb@sources.redhat.com, jimb@redhat.com Message-Id: <20040505052310.A2AF64B104@berman.michael-chastain.com> Date: Wed, 05 May 2004 05:24:00 -0000 From: mec.gnu@mindspring.com (Michael Elizabeth Chastain) X-SW-Source: 2004-05/txt/msg00031.txt.bz2 Hi Andrew, > I believe that you've already demonstrated that there are no dwarf-1 > cross compilers left (they've all migrated to dwarf-2). I'm a bit confused by the "cross compiler" part. For gcc I looked at the config/ bits for all the targets without regard to hosts, so I've always been looking at both natives and crosses. For diab and absoft I read their online manuals and release notes. > That just leaves us with dwarf-1 systems. How many dwarf-1 systems does > GDB still support? If we've also eliminated all our dwarf-1 systems, > there's little sense in retaining dwarf-1 support. What do you mean by 'dwarf-1 system'? If you include systems that support both dwarf-1 and dwarf-2, even if dwarf-1 is not the default, then up to gcc 3.3.3, that includes most ELF-based systems. But all those users have upgrade paths to dwarf-2. If you mean, 'systems where prefer dwarf-1 is the preferred debugging format', here's a table. gcc 3.4.0 none gcc 3.3.2 i[34567]86-sequent-ptx4* no longer supported by gdb i[34567]86-sequent-sysv4* no longer supported by gdb mips-sni-sysv4 no longer supported by gdb sparc-hal-solaris2* still supported by gdb (i think) gcc 3.2.2 all targets from gcc 3.3.3, plus i[34567]86-dg-dgux* still supported by gdb m88k-dg-dgux* no longer supported by gdb gcc 2.95.3 all targets from gcc 3.2.2, plus i[34567]86-ncr-sysv4* still supported by gdb i[34567]86-*-osf1* no longer supported by gdb i[34567]86-*-sco3.2v5* still supported by gdb i[34567]86-*-sysv4* still supported by gdb i860-alliant-* no longer supported by gdb i860-*-sysv4* no longer supported by gdb m68k-atari-sysv4* no longer supported by gdb m68k-cbm-sysv4* no longer supported by gdb m68k-*-sysv4* no longer supported by gdb m88k-*-sysv4* no longer supported by gdb mips-*-gnu* no longer supported by gdb sh-*-elf* still supported by gdb sh-*-rtemself* still supported by gdb sparc-*-sysv4* still supported by gdb That's just gcc. It doesn't include systems with non-gcc compilers that still emit dwarf-1. I don't know if any such systems exist. So if somebody has an i386-dg-dgux system, they could still be using gcc 3.2.2 and dwarf-1. Or i686-unknown-sco3.2v5 and gcc 2.95.3. Or sparc-*-sysv4* and gcc 2.95.3. I'm not sure what the thrust of your question is so I don't know if this is the info that you're looking for. Michael C