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: Best set of gcc options for debugging

From: Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin dot org>
To: David Taylor <dtaylor at emc dot com>
Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org,"Aaron W. LaFramboise" <aaronavay62 at aaronwl dot com>
Date: Fri, 9 Jul 2004 15:42:10 -0400
Subject: Re: Best set of gcc options for debugging
References: <40EDB55A.3050708@aaronwl.com> <20040708222759.GA18706@disaster.jaj.com> <200407091926.i69JQbm06148@mailhub.lss.emc.com>

On Jul 9, 2004, at 3:26 PM, David Taylor wrote:

Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2004 18:27:59 -0400
From: Phil Edwards <phil@codesourcery.com>
On Thu, Jul 08, 2004 at 03:58:02PM -0500, Aaron W. LaFramboise wrote:
Recently, I've been having a lot of frustration using gdb with gcc 3.4.1 (and even more so on 3.5) with stabs.

stabs has a set of problems associated with it that are probably never going to be solved, just because of the limitations with the stabs format.
I can't speak for others, but unless LD starts doing a significantly
better job at eliminating redundant dwarf info than of stabs, I expect
we'll stay with stabs for a long time to come.

As soon as GDB has inter-cu reference support, we will do a good job.

References:
- Best set of gcc options for debugging
  - From: Aaron W. LaFramboise
- Re: Best set of gcc options for debugging
  - From: Phil Edwards
- Re: Best set of gcc options for debugging
  - From: David Taylor

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