X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-bounces using -f
X-Recipient: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on eggs.gnu.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_50,RP_MATCHES_RCVD
	autolearn=disabled version=3.3.2
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2016 22:18:20 +0300
Message-Id: <831t5py22r.fsf@gnu.org>
From: "Eli Zaretskii (eliz AT gnu DOT org) [via djgpp AT delorie DOT com]" <djgpp AT delorie DOT com>
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
In-reply-to: <5722455F.3020906@gmx.de> (djgpp@delorie.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>
X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic]
X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

> Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2016 19:16:15 +0200
> From: "Juan Manuel Guerrero (juan DOT guerrero AT gmx DOT de) [via djgpp AT delorie DOT com]" <djgpp AT delorie DOT com>
> 
> I have compiled the test progran attached to this mail.  I have used djdev206,
> bnu226br3 and gcc346b.  To debug gdb711b has been used.  The test program was
> compiled using -gcoff -O0 flags.  The produced binary works flawless.  If I try
> to debug, gdb crashes like this:
> 
> H:\_TEST_PR>gdb main.exe
> GNU gdb (GDB) 7.11

It was established back in June that GDB later than 7.7 crashes with
COFF debug info.  That is why I used GDB 7.7, which does work (I used
it to successfully debug Emacs produced by older Binutils).

Please try GDB 7.7 or older.

Also, what is djdev206?  The latest I see on DJGPP sites is v2.05, and
AFAIK that is the latest release.

> It is difficult to say if the coff debug support is still functional.

Once again, the problem is definitely with Binutils, not with anything
else.  If nothing else comes as a solution, perhaps just producing
v2.05 compiled Binutils 2.19 would be good enough.

Thanks.