http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48400
--- Comment #16 from Richard Henderson <rth at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-04-02 19:25:50 UTC --- Created attachment 23855 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23855 second proposed patch The fault is 100% with ld. GCC is producing valid dwarf2. The *only* changes in your diff are (1) the description of the standard opcodes, and (2) an empty line number region that has been removed. For (1), you'll note that it *is* an extensible table. One can add new opcodes to the table and remain true to the dwarf2 standard. The consumer is free to ignore any opcodes that it doesn't understand. I hate Apple's linker.