From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2614 invoked by alias); 24 Feb 2002 11:12:27 -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 2521 invoked from network); 24 Feb 2002 11:12:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO is.elta.co.il) (199.203.121.2) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 24 Feb 2002 11:12:23 -0000 Received: from is (is [199.203.121.2]) by is.elta.co.il (8.9.3/8.8.8) with SMTP id NAA29115; Sun, 24 Feb 2002 13:11:24 +0200 (IST) Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2002 03:12:00 -0000 From: Eli Zaretskii X-Sender: eliz@is To: Iso-H cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: gdb-5.x and step over inline functions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-SW-Source: 2002-02/txt/msg00280.txt.bz2 On Sun, 24 Feb 2002, Iso-H wrote: > Is there any way to step over inline functions > when using gdb >= 5.1 ? Some (commandline or other)option > perhaps? Doesn't `until' do that? That is, given that line 123 calls an inline function, and line 124 is the one after the inline function returns, you should be able to say "until 124" and get what you want. Does that work? > I have used gcc option "-g3" with compilations and > my host/target arch is GNULinux-alpha (ev56/ev67) but > I think that this "step over inline functions" problem > exist on other archs too. Does it help to use -gstabs+ instead of -g3? (I assume the latter is a synonym for -gdwarf-2 on your system.)