Current gcj on powerpc

[Bryce McKinlay]

Mark Wielaard wrote:

>  
>
>>You need to build the file that you're debugging without optimization 
>>for GDB to work properly. The easiest way to do that is to "touch 
>>exception.cc" and rebuild libjava with "make CXXFLAGS=-g"
>>    
>>
>
>Thanks, of course the compiler optimizes the assignment away since it is
>never used. But now that I can print it it doesn't make sense:
>
>    110	  abort();
>    (gdb) print code
>    $1 = 268705696
>
>Which doesn't make sense since only value 0 till 8 are meaningfull
>according to unwind.h. Sigh.
>

It might be worth adding a printf ("Unwind code: %i\n", code) or 
whatever in exception.cc just to be sure that the assignment isn't being 
done properly even though optimization isn't used. Also you could try 
putting a breakpoint on _Unwind_RaiseException - which should be easy if 
it is crashing on every throw - and using the "finish" command which 
should show you the returned value.

>I have been readding the patch is parts and it seems that the DSA
>provider classes are to blame (I can add all other changes and new
>classes without problem). But compiling on my powerpc machine is very
>slow so it might take a while till I have found out exactly which of the
>following classes causes this strange behaviour:
>

I still intend to do a build on my PowerBook soon to see if I can 
reproduce this behaviour. My local tree is currently failing to build 
due to some unrelated changes.

regards

Bryce.

>  
>