Bug 21900 - [4.1/4.2 Regression] debugging regression when debugging libgcj
Summary: [4.1/4.2 Regression] debugging regression when debugging libgcj
Status: RESOLVED WORKSFORME
Alias: None
Product: gcc
Classification: Unclassified
Component: java (show other bugs)
Version: 4.1.0
: P5 normal
Target Milestone: 4.1.2
Assignee: Not yet assigned to anyone
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2005-06-03 14:55 UTC by Tom Tromey
Modified: 2006-10-14 08:42 UTC (History)
4 users (show)

See Also:
Host:
Target:
Build:
Known to work:
Known to fail:
Last reconfirmed:

Attachments
Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Tom Tromey 2005-06-03 14:55:19 UTC 
I have noticed a recent change when I debug libgcj.
These days I see things like this from gdb:

(gdb) s
gnu.java.lang.MainThread.MainThread(java.lang.String, java.lang.String[],
boolean) (this=@63f18, classname=@41380, args=@2bfb8, is_jar=false)
    at MainThread.java:78
78	MainThread.java: No such file or directory.
	in MainThread.java
Current language:  auto; currently java


... in the past, gdb knew the directory and I did not have to use 'dir'.
This problem started fairly recently, but I don't know precisely when.
Comment 1 Andrew Pinski 2006-06-04 20:06:50 UTC 
P2 before P3 became default.
Comment 2 Mark Mitchell 2006-07-05 17:44:52 UTC 
Java bugs are not release-critical.  If, however, this is coming from CNI code, then please move this back to P3, and I will re-review.  It would be nice to have a description of what's wrong with the debug output.
Comment 3 Andrew Haley 2006-07-12 16:59:55 UTC 
I can't duplicate this one.

(gdb) s
gnu.java.lang.MainThread.MainThread(java.lang.Class, java.lang.String[]) (this=@2aaab0ac3f80, k=@501a40, 
    args=@2aaaad56ff70)
    at /home/aph/gcc/trunk/libjava/gnu/java/lang/MainThread.java:72
Current language:  auto; currently java

Please give a complete test case.
Comment 4 Andrew Pinski 2006-10-14 03:44:58 UTC 
It has been 3 months since this went into waiting, what is the status of this bug?
Comment 5 Andrew Haley 2006-10-14 08:39:13 UTC 
.
Comment 6 Andrew Haley 2006-10-14 08:42:55 UTC 
I'm closing this bug.  It never was reproducible: I think it was just a one-off.