This is the mail archive of the gcc-help@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: Minimum debug options?

From: Ian Lance Taylor <iant at google dot com>
To: Jonathan Wakely <jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com>
Cc: Raymond Jennings <shentino at gmail dot com>, "gcc-help at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-help at gcc dot gnu dot org>
Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2013 13:51:53 -0700
Subject: Re: Minimum debug options?
References: <CAGDaZ_qy-M6aiS_2ayewMgWjRtDu6UU3d5orLdziM3m-GPM6Dw@mail.gmail.com> <CAH6eHdSu+Q0cg4L4cdYC1AEh=dhADpjGReqUpTjahWP_VQypgQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 10:46 AM, Jonathan Wakely <jwakely.gcc@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 16 March 2013 05:51, Raymond Jennings wrote:
>> What is the minimum debug level/options I need to compile a shared
>> library with enough debug info to allow gdb to produce a stack trace?
>
> -g should work

For what it's worth, the gold linker has a strip-debug-non-line that
preserves only what is needed to get a stack trace.

I believe the google branches of GCC have a -gmlt option that
generates only enough debug info to get a stack trace.  I don't think
that option has been contributed back to main line yet.

Ian

References:
- Minimum debug options?
  - From: Raymond Jennings
- Re: Minimum debug options?
  - From: Jonathan Wakely

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