From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-return-19986-listarch-gdb=sources.redhat.com@sources.redhat.com>
Received: (qmail 9551 invoked by alias); 25 Oct 2004 12:53:44 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-subscribe@sources.redhat.com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb@sources.redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-help@sources.redhat.com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com
Received: (qmail 9522 invoked from network); 25 Oct 2004 12:53:42 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO NUTMEG.CAM.ARTIMI.COM) (217.40.111.177)
  by sourceware.org with SMTP; 25 Oct 2004 12:53:42 -0000
Received: from mace ([192.168.1.25]) by NUTMEG.CAM.ARTIMI.COM with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.211);
	 Mon, 25 Oct 2004 13:52:55 +0100
From: "Dave Korn" <dk@artimi.com>
To: "'Ian Lance Taylor'" <ian@wasabisystems.com>
Cc: <binutils@sources.redhat.com>,
	<gdb@sources.redhat.com>
Subject: RE: "Unrecognized demangle component" error
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 23:11:00 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In-Reply-To: <m3y8hyo7gx.fsf@gossamer.airs.com>
Message-ID: <NUTMEGwZvIPNTAbAWFs000001fe@NUTMEG.CAM.ARTIMI.COM>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 25 Oct 2004 12:52:55.0890 (UTC) FILETIME=[8C3ABB20:01C4BA91]
X-SW-Source: 2004-10/txt/msg00413.txt.bz2

> -----Original Message-----
> From: binutils-owner On Behalf Of Ian Lance Taylor
> Sent: 22 October 2004 20:53

> "Dave Korn" writes:
> 
> > --------------------<snip!>--------------------
> > dk@mace /test> objdump -g macsim.exe
> > 
> > macsim.exe:     file format pei-i386
> > 
> > Unrecognized demangle component
> > --------------------<snip!>--------------------
> > 
> >   Wow.  I've never before come across an error message that 
> brings up so few
> > hits at google.  That's probably because ILT only added it 
> in January:
> > 
> > http://sources.redhat.com/ml/binutils/2004-01/msg00192.html
> > 
> > and I see from the following FIXME that it's not a big 
> surprise that it
> > sometimes fails:
> > 
> > +      /* FIXME: These are demangle component types which 
> we probably
> > +	 need to handle one way or another.  */
> 
> I wonder which component it was.  I should have had the error message
> print it out the number.  It would probably also be friendlier to
> print a warning and then return debug_make_void_type (dhandle).

  OK, I quickly plumbed in those changes (using 2.15 release sources), and see
that they're all without exception references to type #34 which I make out to be
DEMANGLE_COMPONENT_FUNCTION_TYPE.  Ummm.  I would imagine that's a slightly
surprising result, perhaps?

> That is unlikely.  The demangled name is used to determine the
> argument types and the return type of static methods.  It is not used
> for anything involving line numbers.
> 
> I don't know what is causing the line number trouble.

  Thanks Ian, I'll look into that one a bit further.

    cheers, 
      DaveK
-- 
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....