: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com
GCC target triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45695
ReportedBy: jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com
GCC target triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45103
--- Comment #1 from jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com 2010-07-28 09:54
---
Created an attachment (id=21331)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21331action=view)
.s files for x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu.
GDB bug (probably invalid):
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla
--- Comment #3 from jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com 2010-07-23 11:11
---
(In reply to comment #1)
const int i; -fno-zero-initialized-in-bss - .bss= FAIL
You need -fno-common also to get it out of the BSS.
-fno-common now at least correctly reports:
echo 'const int i
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com
GCC target triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44690
kratochvil at redhat dot com
GCC target triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44664
: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com
GCC target triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44668
--- Comment #1 from jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com 2010-06-25 16:31
---
Dependent GDB Bug:
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11757
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44668
--- Comment #2 from jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com 2010-06-21 11:22
---
Checked-in. Forgot to place the PR # there.
r161066 | jkratoch | 2010-06-21 13:16:18 +0200 (Mon, 21 Jun 2010) | 7 lines
gcc/
* Makefile.in (POD2MAN): Provide --date from $(DATESTAMP).
libjava
--- Comment #3 from jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com 2010-06-21 11:29
---
The fastjar part filed as:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailaid=3019015group_id=426atid=100426
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43480
--- Comment #4 from jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com 2010-06-21 11:46
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-06/msg01999.html
Wrongly patched libjava/classpath/ChangeLog , therefore fixed it up:
r161069
--- Comment #23 from jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com 2010-06-07 20:03
---
(In reply to comment #9)
In debug info we could use DW_OP_call{2,4} to refer to those
DIEs' DW_AT_location, but AFAIK gdb doesn't handle those 2 yet.
FYI FSF GDB HEAD supports them now:
http
at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com
GCC target triplet: i386-unknown-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44367
--- Comment #10 from jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com 2010-05-24 19:49
---
GDB counterpart (no patch now):
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11631
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44113
--- Comment #4 from jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com 2010-05-24 19:53
---
Archer counterpart (no patch now):
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11632
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42801
--- Comment #3 from jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com 2010-05-20 16:03
---
No regressions for FSF GDB HEAD x86_64-linux-gnu with FSF GCC HEAD.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44205
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com
GCC target triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44205
: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: debug
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43950
--- Comment #4 from jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com 2010-04-22 18:09
---
Comment 3 has a typo, it should have been for: PR tree-optimization/43842
--
jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com 2010-04-22 18:10
---
But this Bug has been already fixed in Comment 2.
--
jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #7 from jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com 2010-04-20 09:14
---
Created an attachment (id=20436)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20436action=view)
Preliminary GDB patch.
Tobias, could you add DW_AT_MIPS_linkage name?
You say in Comment 3 the debugger
--- Comment #9 from jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com 2010-04-20 12:24
---
(In reply to comment #8)
BTW, should DW_AT_{,MIPS_}linkage_name be also present on DW_TAG_common_block?
[...]
for DW_AT_linkage_name to be allowed on DW_TAG_common_block.
For DW_TAG_common_block
: P3
Component: debug
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com
GCC target triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43762
: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: debug
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com
GCC target triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43628
Component: debug
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com
GCC target triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43478
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com
GCC target triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43479
: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
Priority: P3
Component: other
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43480
--- Comment #1 from jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com 2010-03-22 16:03
---
Created an attachment (id=20159)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20159action=view)
Fix.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43480
kratochvil at redhat dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43482
--- Comment #1 from jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com 2010-03-22 16:30
---
Created an attachment (id=20162)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20162action=view)
Fix.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43482
--- Comment #2 from jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com 2010-03-22 17:55
---
Checked-in:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=revisionrevision=157645
2010-03-22 Jan Kratochvil jan.kratoch...@redhat.com
Fix *.log tests output containing ===.
* dg-extract-results.sh
kratochvil at redhat dot com
GCC target triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43325
--- Comment #2 from jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com 2010-02-08 14:59
---
Sorry, I agree now this Bug is invalid.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42939
: jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com
GCC target triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42939
: 4.5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: debug
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com
GCC target triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla
Severity: minor
Priority: P3
Component: debug
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com
GCC target triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42801
--- Comment #1 from jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com 2010-01-19 10:57
---
Maybe properly limiting DW_AT_location even in -O0 -g mode would be the same.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42801
Component: debug
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com
GCC target triplet: i386-unknown-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42782
--- Comment #1 from jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com 2010-01-17 23:23
---
Noticed it is a regression against: gcc (GCC) 4.4.3 20100117 (prerelease)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42782
contains unused macros
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
Priority: P3
Component: debug
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com
GCC target
--- Comment #2 from jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com 2009-11-16 14:49
---
(In reply to comment #1)
-g3 currently produces huge objects as it contains many unused macros.
-g2 produces no macros debug info so GDB cannot provide its expansion.
That is by design and the reason
--- Comment #3 from jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com 2009-10-06 15:28
---
(In reply to comment #1)
BTW, gdb 7.0.50.20091005-cvs doesn't work with the guality.exp testcases well,
something broke in it recently. 6.8.91.20090917-1.fc12 works fine.
There is an array with variable
: 4.5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: debug
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com
GCC target triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla
ReportedBy: jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com
GCC target triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41469
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com
GCC target triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41470
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
Priority: P3
Component: debug
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com
GCC target triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla
Priority: P3
Component: debug
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com
GCC target triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40040
--- Comment #2 from jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com 2009-05-06 10:54
---
(In reply to comment #1)
If DW_AT_location isn't provided, how would gdb find that address out? Using
DW_AT_MIPS_linkage_name (currently not emitted) and symbol lookup?
The GDB patch now assembles
--- Comment #5 from jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com 2009-05-06 20:12
---
(In reply to comment #4)
I don't know how ready GDB et al are to cope with this,
(For GDB the local definitions containing an address expression are even less
problematic than the current declarations
--- Comment #2 from jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com 2009-04-30 07:52
---
Please close it as DUPLICATE of PR debug/35463.
--
jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com 2009-04-30 15:15
---
Just that I agree this Bug looks to me fixed in g++-4.5.
The sample code like what is Comment 0 here from:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-help/2009-04/msg00393.html
gives DW_TAG_structure_type DW_AT_name
--- Comment #9 from jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com 2009-04-02 21:09
---
Fixed in FSF GDB HEAD:
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2009-03/threads.html#00595
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2009-04/threads.html#00040
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-cvs/2009-04/msg00021.html
--- Comment #6 from jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com 2009-04-02 21:26
---
No real regressions. Formally:
+FAIL: gdb.base/stack-checking.exp: continue to breakpoint: breakpoint for big
frame
+FAIL: gdb.base/stack-checking.exp: bt
which is PR middle-end/13757: -fstack-check
--- Comment #6 from jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com 2009-03-28 21:34
---
No regressions for GDB.
GDB requires the extra patch otherwise it still does not work with patched GCC:
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2009-03/msg00595.html
FYI the patch generates one extra file-scope
Version: 4.4.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
Priority: P3
Component: debug
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com
GCC target triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org
--- Comment #1 from jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com 2009-03-26 22:57
---
As DW_AT_external-DW_TAG_variable in the inner block is incompatible with
current GDB
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2009-03/msg00595.html
the current C++ method of DW_TAG_imported_declaration
: 4.4.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: debug
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com
GCC target triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org
--- Comment #3 from jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com 2009-03-23 11:32
---
One fix should be enough next time, thanks.
Going to gdb-regression test both the patches (in Fedora GCC on Fedora 11).
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39524
--- Comment #3 from jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com 2009-03-18 18:01
---
I see I messed it up, in some way was gcc-4.4 more correct than gcc-4.3
Thanks for the fix although now I would not probably bugreport it at all.
It turned PASS-XFAIL.
But in fact PASS means SKIP
--- Comment #9 from jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com 2009-03-17 10:05
---
I no longer see any DWARF problem there but Archer C++ still does not work with
g++-4.4. Assuming an Archer bug due to the new DW_TAG_lexical_block block.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id
--- Comment #3 from jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com 2009-03-17 10:03
---
It works for the gdb.python/python-template.exp test, thanks.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39474
to a register
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
Priority: P3
Component: debug
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com
GCC target triplet: x86_64
--- Comment #1 from jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com 2009-03-16 14:24
---
Verified as the problem exists on GNU C++ 4.4.0 20090315 (experimental).
Tried also non-main function and slightly complicated function.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37890
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: debug
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com
GCC target triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39471
kratochvil at redhat dot com
GCC target triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39474
--- Comment #2 from jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com 2009-03-16 21:37
---
Thanks although there is still excessive DW_AT_name:
3422: Abbrev Number: 12 (DW_TAG_imported_module)
425 DW_AT_name: A
427 DW_AT_import : 0x113 [Abbrev Number: 2 (DW_TAG_namespace
--- Comment #13 from jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com 2009-02-12 09:35
---
The flat (so far no namespacing) DW_TAG_module support is now in GDB CVS.
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-cvs/2009-02/msg00073.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39073
--- Comment #9 from jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com 2009-02-02 13:48
---
Confirming it is a GDB bug, DW_TAG_module is completely ignored by
dwarf2read.c.
Older GCCs did not support module namespaces so it may look as a regression.
I hope to patch it soon although I have
--- Comment #13 from jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com 2008-12-21 19:33
---
Please make this Bug CLOSED as the point 1 has been fixed by Alexandre Oliva
and the point 2 is already filed as PR debug/11208.
--
jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com changed:
What
--- Comment #2 from jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com 2008-12-06 13:22
---
It looks fixed in 4.4 for me, tested on:
GNU C (GCC) version 4.4.0 20081202 (experimental) (x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu)
compiled by GNU C version 4.4.0 20081202 (experimental), GMP version
4.2.2, MPFR
: debug
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com
GCC build triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
GCC host triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
GCC target triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38390
--- Comment #7 from jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com 2008-11-29 00:23
---
(In reply to comment #6)
I ran into this issue because gdb was only reading die 0x86 for variable
'elsewhere' (I have not looked into why). The problem is that without proper
scoping on an abstract_origin
--- Comment #5 from jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com 2008-11-28 01:36
---
(In reply to comment #4)
First, I think the DIE representing the defining declaration of A::elsewhere
in class2.c should have a DW_AT_specification pointing back to the DIE
representing the declaration
: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: blocker
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com
GCC build triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
GCC host triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
GCC target
--
jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|blocker |normal
Summary|Fatal Error: Reading module |Ignored
--- Comment #3 from jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com 2008-11-24 16:40
---
Created an attachment (id=16759)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16759action=view)
Check the file manipulations errors.
Thanks Tobias B.,
unlink(mmm.mod) = -1 EPERM
--- Comment #1 from jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com 2008-11-24 20:08
---
The excessive item 53 is really still present in Fedora
gcc-c++-4.3.2-7.x86_64 but not in HEAD - 4.4.0 20081124:
12d: Abbrev Number: 2 (DW_TAG_namespace)
2e DW_AT_name: D
30
--- Comment #3 from jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com 2008-10-13 14:34
---
Fedora gcc-4.3.2-6.x86_64 with -m32 is still buggy as described in the Comment
0.
But HEAD works OK now (-m32) so closing, thanks for the test:
GNU C (GCC) version 4.4.0 20081007 (experimental) (x86_64
--- Comment #3 from jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com 2008-10-07 23:10
---
FYI I find at least this specific reported testcase as already fixed by Jason:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-09/msg00729.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-10/msg00189.html
GCC now even
Component: debug
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com
GCC build triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
GCC host triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
GCC target triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla
--- Comment #1 from jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com 2008-10-05 15:33
---
Saw there also needless DW_OP_plus_uconst - it could be single DW_OP_addr for
all the common block variables (which would make the GDB support a bit easier).
program a2
INTEGER*4 a
INTEGER*4 b
common
--- Comment #6 from jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com 2008-09-22 15:32
---
Tom, could you elaborate why x1 and x2 should be printed differently?
I do not say they should not but I do not see a clear reason for either way.
Should we also try to record the source name
DW_TAG_lexical_block
Product: gcc
Version: 4.3.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
Priority: P3
Component: debug
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com
GCC build triplet
--- Comment #1 from jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com 2008-09-07 17:56
---
Created an attachment (id=16249)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16249action=view)
Testcase.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37410
--- Comment #3 from jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com 2008-08-18 08:24
---
The fix was posted at:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-05/msg01857.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35998
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: debug
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com
GCC build triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
GCC host triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
GCC target triplet
--- Comment #2 from jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com 2008-05-19 22:19
---
Created an attachment (id=15654)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=15654action=view)
GCC fix.
Omit the whole attribute DW_AT_byte_size 0x.
GCC testsuite ran on x86 and x86_64.
GDB
Version: 4.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
Priority: P3
Component: ada
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com
GCC build triplet: x86_64-fedora-linux-gnu
GCC host triplet: x86_64
--- Comment #1 from jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com 2008-04-21 12:40
---
Created an attachment (id=15503)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=15503action=view)
GDB workaround.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35998
--- Comment #8 from jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com 2007-11-01 17:37
---
ptype testcase is now in GDB as: gdb/testsuite/gdb.cp/arg-reference.exp
(GDB still does not create the temporary copy during a call from GDB itself.)
--
jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com changed
at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com
GCC host triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30292
--- Comment #1 from jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com 2006-12-26 05:38
---
Created an attachment (id=12843)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12843action=view)
Fix using a new gcc.c variable.
4.1.1 testsuite results not affected.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
Priority: P3
Component: debug
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com
GCC build triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu
GCC host triplet
93 matches
Mail list logo
