This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Update of gcc/config/alpha/elf.h


On Tuesday 03 September 2002 09:05 am, Peter Barada wrote:
> >+/* use new GNU-AS debug options - dwarf2 unless told otherwise. */
> >+#define ASM_SPEC  "%{G*}
> > %{relax:-relax}%{!gstabs*:-gdwarf2}%{gstabs*:-gstabs}"
>
> You'll have a problem if someone specifies '-relax' since you didn't
> leave a space to seperate it from the following options.  The result
> will be '-relax-gdwarf2' if -relax is specified and -gdwarf2 is not.
>
> May I suggest:
>
> +/* use new GNU-AS debug options - dwarf2 unless told otherwise. */
> +#define ASM_SPEC  \
> "%{G*} %{relax:-relax }%{!gstabs*:-gdwarf2}%{gstabs*:-gstabs} "
Thanks,
The generation of -no-mdebug  was being triggered by inconsistant 
definitions in the configuration files concerning debugging. Fixed already 
in releases more recent than gcc-3.1.1

Which raises another question in my mind...

Should there be (four? or more?) translations here to translate both old and 
new debug options?
It is true that the compiler was issueing "WARNING" messages about the 
redefinitions;
That wasn't immediately apparent as being the cause of
the compiler issueing an unrecognized debug option to the assembler; 
after all, they where only WARNINGS. (They couldn't be anything else, the 
compiler can't be expected to know what the side-effects of bad code is.)

I realized after I had sent the orginal post that I hadn't covered the "debug none"
case - My original post would pass -gdwarf2 unless stabs had been specified.

Well, I have to agree; my first suggestion stinks.
But perhaps there is something that should be done here.

Mike


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]