X-Authentication-Warning: acp3bf.physik.rwth-aachen.de: broeker owned process doing -bs Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 16:34:21 +0100 (MET) From: Hans-Bernhard Broeker X-Sender: broeker AT acp3bf To: Eli Zaretskii cc: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com Subject: Re: Debugging difficulties with GCC 2.95.2 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com Errors-To: dj-admin AT delorie DOT com X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com Precedence: bulk On Thu, 2 Mar 2000, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > On Thu, 2 Mar 2000, Hans-Bernhard Broeker wrote: > > > I've had a glance at this week's snapshot of gcc (egcs-20000228), and > > there's been quite some activity in the i386 stack frame handling stuff, > > recently, including the prologue/epilogue generator. > > Yep, probably the reason for the GDB test suite breakage. I've read the GDB thread you pointed me to, in the meantime. They suspect that a *very* recent change in gcc: 2000-02-17 Mark Mitchell * function.c (thread_prologue_and_epilogue_insns): Put a line note after the prologue. has broken the GDB testsuite. I think that change tries to work around the bug we've been talking about, here: that there currently is no .ln between the prologue and the 'real' code of the function. Seems it's outputting the wrong line number (of the opening brace, instead of the first line of active code), confusing the GDB test scripts. I'll put a mail to the gdb mailing list, describing my results. Hans-Bernhard Broeker (broeker AT physik DOT rwth-aachen DOT de) Even if all the snow were burnt, ashes would remain.