These are the results of processing your source code with the following command: g++ -gdwarf [input] Exit code: 256 Messages: /usr/local/include/g++-v3/bits/locale_facets.tcc:75: Internal compiler error in dwarfout_finish, at dwarfout.c:6535 Please submit a full bug report, with preprocessed source if appropriate. See for instructions. ############################### Add. comment: Unfortunately I need the -gdwarf option, because the Fortran 90 compiler I use (Absoft Pro Fortran) can only debug this format. On the other hand gdb is not able to debug the F90 source. Release: gcc-3.0 Environment: RedHat 6.2 (glibc 2.1); AMD 1GHz How-To-Repeat: g++ -gdwarf delaval_bug.ii
State-Changed-From-To: open->analyzed State-Changed-Why: Reproduced in gcc 3.1 and gcc 3.0 branch. Is using -gdwarf-2 an acceptable workaround?
From: Craig Rodrigues <rodrigc@mediaone.net> To: gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org Cc: Subject: Re: c++/3524: Source can not be comiled using option -gdwarf Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 15:55:29 -0500 ----- Forwarded message from Bailing Li <Bailing.Li@noaa.gov> ----- Delivered-To: rodrigc@gcc.gnu.org From: "Bailing Li" <Bailing.Li@noaa.gov> To: rodrigc@gcc.gnu.org Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 19:40:02 GMT X-Mailer: Netscape Webmail Subject: Re: c++/3524: Source can not be comiled using option -gdwarf X-Accept-Language: en Not really. Using makes the code buildable, but it crashed in my pgdbg debug which is dwarf based. What's the difference between -gdwarf and -gdwarf-2? Thanks any information, Bailing ----- Original Message ----- From: rodrigc@gcc.gnu.org Date: Friday, December 14, 2001 7:17 pm Subject: Re: c++/3524: Source can not be comiled using option -gdwarf > Synopsis: Source can not be comiled using option -gdwarf > > State-Changed-From-To: open->analyzed > State-Changed-By: rodrigc > State-Changed-When: Fri Dec 14 11:17:23 2001 > State-Changed-Why: > Reproduced in gcc 3.1 and gcc 3.0 branch. > > Is using -gdwarf-2 an acceptable workaround? > > http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view%20audit- > trail&pr=3524&database=gcc ----- End forwarded message ----- -- Craig Rodrigues http://www.gis.net/~craigr rodrigc@mediaone.net
From: rodrigc@gcc.gnu.org To: axel.geller@epost.de, bailing.li@noaa.gov, gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, nobody@gcc.gnu.org Cc: Subject: Re: c++/3524: Source can not be comiled using option -gdwarf Date: 14 Dec 2001 19:17:25 -0000 Synopsis: Source can not be comiled using option -gdwarf State-Changed-From-To: open->analyzed State-Changed-By: rodrigc State-Changed-When: Fri Dec 14 11:17:23 2001 State-Changed-Why: Reproduced in gcc 3.1 and gcc 3.0 branch. Is using -gdwarf-2 an acceptable workaround? http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view%20audit-trail&pr=3524&database=gcc
Since DWARF1 debugging format is deprecated, I am suspending this until someone updates dwarf1 debugging support or it gets removed from gcc. from the output of 3.3.1 (): abstractstage.cpp:0: warning: support for the DWARF1 debugging format is deprecated
-gdwarf-2 is DWARF version 2/3.
-gdwarf have been removed from GCC for 3.4 so closing as will not fix.