From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-return-42128-listarch-gdb=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 32134 invoked by alias); 13 May 2013 16:15:41 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org
Received: (qmail 32116 invoked by uid 89); 13 May 2013 16:15:41 -0000
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-3.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
Received: from c62.cesmail.net (HELO c62.cesmail.net) (216.154.195.54)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.84/v0.84-167-ge50287c) with ESMTP; Mon, 13 May 2013 16:15:40 +0000
Received: from unknown (HELO epsilon2) ([192.168.1.60])  by c62.cesmail.net with ESMTP; 13 May 2013 12:15:38 -0400
Received: from cust213-dsl91-135-11.idnet.net	(cust213-dsl91-135-11.idnet.net [91.135.11.213]) by webmail.spamcop.net	(Horde MIME library) with HTTP; Mon, 13 May 2013 12:15:38 -0400
Message-ID: <20130513121538.scq8ll234ccc4oc0-nzlynne@webmail.spamcop.net>
Date: Mon, 13 May 2013 16:15:00 -0000
From: Joern Rennecke <joern.rennecke@embecosm.com>
To: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
Cc: David Taylor <dtaylor@emc.com>, gcc@gcc.gnu.org, gdb@sourceware.org,	binutils@zalov.cz
Subject: Re: stabs changes for 64 bit targets
References: <18975.1368456346@usendtaylorx2l>	<20130513145224.GY1377@tucnak.redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <20130513145224.GY1377@tucnak.redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;	charset=ISO-8859-15;	DelSp="Yes";	format="flowed"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) H3 (4.1.4)
X-SW-Source: 2013-05/txt/msg00055.txt.bz2

Quoting Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>:

> On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 10:45:46AM -0400, David Taylor wrote:
>> There are problems when using current STABS debug format for 64 bit
>> targets.
>
> Why are you considering extending STABS at this point?
> STABS support might very well be dropped altogether from GCC 4.9 or the next
> release, people just should use DWARF[234] everywhere.

I find stabs is still helpful when you try to inspect the assembly output
by hand (or more precisely, by visual inspection in a text editor / pager).