On Tue, 2011-05-03 at 16:24 -0400, Jason Merrill wrote: > That makes sense to me; it seems appropriate for -g1 to have information > that makes a backtrace more informative, but not information for > interactive debugging. Jim, do you have an opinion?
I'm not aware of any significant use of -g1. It is very rare for anyone to mention it in a bug report for instance. Once upon a time (before 2002-03-19), it was used for compiling libgcc, but that was just to ensure that it got tested somewhere. From my Cisco experience, I would agree that backtraces without line numbers are not very useful. It would be OK with me if these changes were added to -g1 instead of creating a new -gmlt option. Jim