From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15186 invoked by alias); 31 Aug 2009 16:38:43 -0000 Received: (qmail 15151 invoked by uid 22791); 31 Aug 2009 16:38:42 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from bromo.med.uc.edu (HELO bromo.med.uc.edu) (129.137.3.146) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with SMTP; Mon, 31 Aug 2009 16:38:37 +0000 Received: from bromo.med.uc.edu (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by bromo.med.uc.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6A9BB0060; Mon, 31 Aug 2009 12:38:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from howarth@localhost) by bromo.med.uc.edu (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) id n7VGcZtN013422; Mon, 31 Aug 2009 12:38:35 -0400 Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2009 18:11:00 -0000 From: Jack Howarth To: Tristan Gingold Cc: gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: gdb cvs vs x86_64-apple-darwin10 Message-ID: <20090831163835.GB12873@bromo.med.uc.edu> References: <20090830202035.GA2791@bromo.med.uc.edu> <87612A64-948A-408C-B0CD-FCCED70C1309@adacore.com> <20090831132221.GC10965@bromo.med.uc.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2009-08/txt/msg00279.txt.bz2 On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 03:33:08PM +0200, Tristan Gingold wrote: > > On Aug 31, 2009, at 3:22 PM, Jack Howarth wrote: >> Tristan, >> Getting x86_64-apple-darwin10 working should be a higher priority >> for gdb 7.0 since it sounds like after the VTA branch merge into gcc >> 4.5, we will need to have access to gdb 7.0 to debug code generated >> with gcc 4.5 on darwin. > > Hi, > > can you clarify your issue: is it Snow Leopard vs Leopard (as I thought > first) > or is it fsf-gdb vs Apple gdb ? > > I might be wrong but VTA concerns only optimized code, so we will be > able to debug code generated > without optimizations. > > Tristan. Tristan, If you follow the thread starting at... http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-08/msg01629.html you will see other platforms like AIX are concerned as well. The best answer I have read so far... http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-08/msg01656.html ...suggests that FSF gcc will 'try' to maintain compatibility in the generated debug code but may not go out of their way to keep hacks to work around bugs in the older version of gdb. Jack