Patch to fix PR9861
Andrew Haley
aph@redhat.com
Mon Sep 26 17:43:00 GMT 2005
Ian Lance Taylor writes:
> Andrew Haley <aph@redhat.com> writes:
>
> > > I would expect similar behavior from GDB (except that in GDB, the
> > > lack of demangling would really complicate things more than the
> > > same lack in binutils). So, my opinion is that GDB is the main
> > > problem here, since this patch effectively makes Java debugging
> > > very difficult with an unpatched GDB.
> >
> > It does. However, it might be possible to persuade people to ship
> > updated bnutils on free operating systems. Unfree systems are going
> > to be much more problematic, though.
>
> How much do we care?
That's a good question. I don't know, really: what I do know is that
I don't want to be fielding many bug reports about this.
> Presumably we are talking about people who are downloading their
> own gcc and building it themselves. Otherwise, keeping gcc and gdb
> in synch is the responsibility of the distributor. People who
> download their own gcc can always download their own gdb.
I agree. However, I think we should be fairly careful about the
timing for this change. One thought: if we make this change just
before 4.1 branches, we'll have the branch stabilization period to get
the changes pushed through to gdb and binutils.
Andrew.
More information about the Java-patches
mailing list