From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10720 invoked by alias); 9 Jun 2004 17:58:23 -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 10672 invoked from network); 9 Jun 2004 17:58:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lakermmtao03.cox.net) (68.230.240.36) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 9 Jun 2004 17:58:21 -0000 Received: from white ([68.9.64.121]) by lakermmtao03.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.03.02 201-2131-111-104-20040324) with ESMTP id <20040609175820.HAOK15707.lakermmtao03.cox.net@white> for ; Wed, 9 Jun 2004 13:58:20 -0400 Received: from bob by white with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1BY7L9-00035x-00 for ; Wed, 09 Jun 2004 13:58:19 -0400 Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2004 17:58:00 -0000 From: Bob Rossi To: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: dwarf2read.c:read_partial_die question Message-ID: <20040609175819.GC11598@white> Mail-Followup-To: gdb@sources.redhat.com References: <20040609154226.GC11156@white> <20040609154544.GA27720@nevyn.them.org> <20040609160526.GB11598@white> <20040609170429.GA29996@nevyn.them.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040609170429.GA29996@nevyn.them.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i X-SW-Source: 2004-06/txt/msg00077.txt.bz2 On Wed, Jun 09, 2004 at 01:04:29PM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > On Wed, Jun 09, 2004 at 12:05:26PM -0400, Bob Rossi wrote: > > > > This is the comment in the testcase (twice.exp) that is producing this > > > > behavior > > > > # Test that GDB can still detect whether we have line numbers > > > > # even if we're executing code in an include file. > > > > > > Check what GCC is emiting (readelf -wi); do you have a compilation unit > > > missing these attributes, or have we lost track of them somehow? > > > > Whoa, readelf is a great command! I was trying to read the assembly file > > when I wrote the patch :) Since I don't know what part of this file to > > send in, the whole thing is below. > > > > Basically, I just run the twice.exp testcase, and then I ran GDB on > > twice-tmp. Here's the output. It looks as if the compiler is not > > outputting the DW_AT_comp_dir directive for this file. Is this a bug in > > GCC? > > I don't think so. There's an absolute path so DW_AT_comp_dir would not > add any information. Is there some reason we can't cope with this? OK, I understand. No I don't think that there has to be a DW_AT_comp_dir for this file. The -file-list-exec-source-files patch I have was causing GDB to segfault because I assummed that the data would always be there. I fixed the segfault so all should be good. I just wanted to make sure I wasn't covering something up that was broken at a deeper level. Thanks, Bob Rossi