This is the mail archive of the
gdb@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: fix sjlj eh vs dwarf2 debug
- To: Andrew Cagney <ac131313 at cygnus dot com>
- Subject: Re: fix sjlj eh vs dwarf2 debug
- From: Jason Merrill <jason_merrill at redhat dot com>
- Date: 23 Aug 2001 11:18:45 +0100
- Cc: Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, mark at codesourcery dot com, gdb at sources dot redhat dot com
- References: <20010814121628.A30538@redhat.com><20010814121921.A8417@redhat.com><m3snetskrt.fsf@prospero.cambridge.redhat.com><3B847864.7060106@cygnus.com>
>>>>> "Andrew" == Andrew Cagney <ac131313@cygnus.com> writes:
>>>>>>> "Richard" == Richard Henderson <rth@redhat.com> writes:
>>
>>> On Tue, Aug 14, 2001 at 12:16:28PM -0700, Richard Henderson wrote:
>>
>>>> * dwarf2out.c (dwarf2out_frame_finish): Never emit .eh_frame
>>>> if USING_SJLJ_EXCEPTIONS.
>>
>>> Actually, I take that back. Now that we are (or may be) encoding
>>> .eh_frame data in non-standard ways, we should probably not try to
>>> emit only one of .eh_frame or .debug_frame. That way the debugger
>>> doesn't have to care about whatever funnies we do with augmentation.
>>
>>> Jason, what are your thoughts?
>> That makes sense to me. What do gdb folks think?
> This won't affect GDB(1). I'd go with what ever the current interpretation
> of the standards are.
.debug_frame is part of the DWARF 2 standard; .eh_frame is our own
modification of that format for use in a loaded section, for which there is
no standard but gcc.
Jason