X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-workers-bounces using -f
From: Andris Pavenis <pavenis AT latnet DOT lv>
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: Patches to build GDB 6.3
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 18:21:50 +0200
User-Agent: KMail/1.7.1
References: <01c4c987$Blat.v2.2.2$52b9e920 AT zahav DOT net DOT il> <200412071801 DOT 32752 DOT pavenis AT latnet DOT lv> <200412071603 DOT iB7G3X8c001599 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com>
In-Reply-To: <200412071603.iB7G3X8c001599@envy.delorie.com>
Cc: dj AT delorie DOT com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200412071821.50626.pavenis@latnet.lv>
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at fgi.fi
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com

On Tuesday 07 December 2004 18:03, DJ Delorie wrote:
> > > What is the patch you need?
> >
> > It's not in official sources. All DWARF2 related stuff is only on our own
> > changes.
> >
> > For last tests I defined
> > #define DBX_REGISTER_REGNUM(n) svr4_dbx_register_map[n]
> > and removed definition of DWARF_FRAME _REGNUM so it's defaults
> > to DBX_REGISTER_REGNUM(n).
>
> So... we're just renumbering dwarf registers?  Is our incompatible
> scheme compatible with linux?  That would be the only non-technical
> reason for such a change.

Above mentioned way is compatible. My previous one was not.
After recompiling my own sources (not C++ libraries) I got problems
with C++ exceptions (for example exception was not catched). However 
I need more testing perhaps after rebuilding libraries, which I used.

Also incompatible scheme breaks GDB backtrace command, at least for
GDB-6.3. After fixing the problem with djgpp.h, also problem with GDB 
disappears.

> I think, if we need to break compatibility, we should plan on
> coordinating the libc 2.04 release with a gcc 4.0 release, and make
> the changes for that.  At least we'd stand a better chance of getting
> everything that way.

In that case we'll have to notice that new GDB versions will perhaps not
work with GCC-3.X. So I think we may need to consider updating gcc-3.X.

Andris