X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-bounces using -f
X-Recipient:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Message-ID:	<5723B974.3010800@gmx.de>
Date:	Fri, 29 Apr 2016 21:43:48 +0200
From:	"Juan Manuel Guerrero (juan DOT guerrero AT gmx DOT de) [via djgpp AT delorie DOT com]" <djgpp AT delorie DOT com>
User-Agent:	Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; de; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101206 SUSE/3.1.7 Thunderbird/3.1.7
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: GCC 3.4.6 -gcoff produces executable without line number info
References:	<83bn4uxben DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org> <837ffix9o7 DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org> <5722455F DOT 3020906 AT gmx DOT de> <831t5py22r DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org> <57228FEC DOT 9080408 AT gmx DOT de> <83oa8sx19b DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org>
In-Reply-To:	<83oa8sx19b.fsf@gnu.org>
X-Provags-ID:	V03:K0:MqjE10TVJQmkRB236ZbZ+KUVIsE1u8coUzn7DhyIYxOYznIRqX1
	YcWPcFLeghPr1/PcsX0+OTRnr0EUP5S5AL3UVP29q/sQ331eBAYmzmk8ZKIQ10gUyiVIhDG
	6/ZaDUbXEd5ECZibYkK9ngr+Ngv9tc+5DS+nYGnh5iuUS2OChwdv/AAeRAojziC5HJ4tyjL
	kCBbPQ+RxqpeSYWug27NA==
X-UI-Out-Filterresults:	notjunk:1;V01:K0:BVkkQ7capdY=:7JMrG9BMTk5zU37IFVaazH
	12y5QHywZpcbLKYwqA0UfTqB9YYg5Yu3Osby14gUO/ga3jPz+UI2p3EaM2KceGeNeiZyd/YyT
	1lr4uJZKU6seEG6FQkfzyjVYzHrUBu7p2IF+fO9MTwGzfpzpxlxiwJPleQlXM934WEuxCmYFq
	fiAbM93an5UrUKL6ZDWqsNI6ZixrGd1BidNvqPW192wR20gTGLbm1Tqlbd9nxEnM2CPPPup1F
	ICUdjCbzr9ObNucsr/QBg8ikkPdXyD8iIGzC3NNRqgPPOJ1WUT6UY9re2qG/MCET03mNTIMnd
	QIyo+YGsp/hMSzkyCGsFWb2f72a3oEGQ0mdKtK3G7uXprl/LgkP9gMoXUGw/FtbCmJdBx6Ifl
	791AZmYdnVh+fZIK8sdxT9vFV/+UOEcGKwKjvgjnej8OF34pIBqWjnzbK7lMTfQhJrBVkTRmV
	NctSW0EAS9Qk3tg++bKNE+eGjf6eJXEbQFbgf9KkP1XFEStq9yz9VcL6krVAUGq5ig6ztvE1O
	Bo7+vGZ4ou00tcH5I+lWMPfI1GBC8rZHJqcDAMoL8uc3eh2A0lNe1VrbFQCEsTaIR2nfpcrDr
	3ArD8+UltZemN8nE5VIso5PaLlXFQ/YBxmeKjWHxNC2PhIr4P1weJvK35z7iUcAkMcK9rKI4f
	79ux0BAM2drZohs4IV47dDWnedMA7dBiJ6aun7MwH+HdNTsaRu7gNSrQK6y1LGJcPp0lRPOco
	rjrZ4ZYMVVnMX4t2VYx4EVjtQf3sCCyIgz9qGSrOauWLPcEHxZbObcqCnjkgrj0CrSl/ny5uB
	pvCkHNh
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com

Am 29.04.2016 10:33, schrieb Eli Zaretskii (eliz AT gnu DOT org) [via djgpp AT delorie DOT com]:
 > > There is absolute nothing broken with binutils 2.26.  The only thing broken
 > > is gdb's capability of supporting coff debug information.  I have compiled the
 > > sample program I have attached in the previous mail using djdev205, gcc346 und
 > > bnu226br3 using -gcoff -O0 flags.
 >
 > It turns out I had bnu226b installed, not bnu226br3.  Installing the
 > latter does indeed allow me to debug your test program and also debug
 > Emacs, thanks.  (Is there really such a big difference between bnu226b
 > and bnu226br3?)

Yes, bnu226b and bnu226br1 were very badly broken.  I had tried to re-introduce
ELF support as it had been provided by Daniel Borca's DJGPP port of binutils 2.16.
This attempt had broken everyting so I had decided to deleted bnu226b and bnu226br1
from the ftp server in the hope that no one would continue using them anymore.
IIRC bnu2251br1 was broken due to the same reason.  bnu226br3 is the recommended one.


 > > The __only__ DJGPP ports of gdb that are capable to step through the
 > > code are gdb53b and gdb64b and no other ones.
 >
 > I have a build of a (pretest of) GDB 6.9, and it does work with COFF
 > debug info.  I have been using that build for many years when I needed
 > to debug DJGPP Emacs.  It is an old v2.03 build, so I hope I won't run
 > into issues with low-level incompatibilities wrt v2.05 compiled
 > binaries.
 >
 > I see no binary packages for GDB 5.3 or 6.4 on DJGPP FTP sites,
 > certainly not in the 'current' tree.  The 'current.old' tree has GDB
 > 5.3 and 6.1.1 (or is it 6.11?), but not 6.4.

They are in http://www.delorie.com/pub/djgpp/deleted/beta/v2gnu/.  They were
compiled with djdev204.  By using these versions, my intention was to avoid
subtle incompatibilities between v2.03 and v2.04/v2.05.  I wanted to check
programs compiled either with v2.05 or v2.04 only.
BTW it is GDB 6.1.1.


 > > The port gdb72b is still capable to step into main function but has lost its
 > > capability to step into functions.  This means that you can only step through
 > > the code of the main function and nothing else.  _All_ other DJGPP ports of gdb
 > > starting with gdb73b are completely broken concerning coff debug support and
 > > cannot be used at all.  Starting with gdb73, you will get the well known error
 > > message:
 > [snip]
 > >
 > > I have repeated this experiment three more times, first using bnu214 and then
 > > bnu219 instead of bnu226br3.  The results are absolute the same!!!  The last
 > > debugger that supports coff debug info is gdb64 and no one else.  I have
 > > repeated the experiment a third with a freshly compiled version bnu219.  For
 > > this purpose djdev205, gcc346 and bnu219 have been used to compile the new as
 > > and ld.  It was clear that this would be a complete waist of time because it
 > > was clear that the used library would have no impact on the broken coff debug
 > > support either in gcc or gdb or as or ld.  The outcome was the same again:
 > > gdb53b and gdb64b are OK but any other version of gdb is absolutely useless.
 > > The bottom line is, it does not matter what binutils are used; you must use
 > > the right gdb version.
 >
 > OK, thanks for this information.  I can only add that 6.9 seems to be
 > OK as well -- as long as Binutils 2.26r3 are used.  Perhaps we could
 > have v2.05 compiled GDB 6.9 on DJGPP sites?

Yes, of course, if you make it available.  I have looked at ftp://ftp.fu-berlin.de/gnu/gdb/
and I have only found:
   gdb-6.8a.tar.bz2
   gdb-7.0a.tar.bz2
I do not understand the denomination.  Shall the "a" mean it is alpha?  I have
have not tried any of them.  It seems to be that the GDB 6.N.N serie still
supports COFF debug info and that the GDB 7.N.N have dropt them at some point.


Regards,
Juan M. Guerrero

- Raw text -