Message-Id: <199907290027.AAA82496@out5.ibm.net> From: "Mark E." To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com, binutils AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 20:27:45 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: Another script for building binutils In-reply-to: X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.11) Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com Precedence: bulk > Last test were done with binutils snapshots (990727 appears to be > bad: broken debug info, so I'll perhaps return to 990710 which I > used for some time). Hi Andris, I'm also sending this to binutils so perhaps we can get some help. I did some testing and found that compiling with -g (for COFF debugging) doesn't work properly while using -gstabs+ will work with my sample C program. How I tested: I compiled a small C program to an .s file using 'gcc -gstabs+ -S main.c'. I then used the as.exe from Dec '98 to generate a .o file and an as.exe from July 26th to do the same but with a different filename. I was able to step through the generated executables derived from both .o files with rhgdb.exe. I then generated another .s file using 'gcc -g -S main.c' and repeated the generation of the two .o files. I could debug the main.exe derived from the Dec. '98 as.exe generated .o file. However, I could only step one line into the main.exe derived from the Jul. 26th generated .o file. Andris, is this something like what you found? If this is something that only happened very recently, the cause should be easily traceable. BTW, I made sure to disable long section support and my alignment patch #2 before testing. Mark --- Mark Elbrecht, snowball3 AT bigfoot DOT com http://snowball.frogspace.net/