[BUG] Regression in 2.14.90 (relative to 2.13.90)
Daniel Jacobowitz
drow@mvista.com
Wed Nov 26 15:36:00 GMT 2003
More information about the Binutils mailing list
Wed Nov 26 15:36:00 GMT 2003
- Previous message (by thread): [BUG] Regression in 2.14.90 (relative to 2.13.90)
- Next message (by thread): [BUG] Regression in 2.14.90 (relative to 2.13.90)
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Wed, Nov 26, 2003 at 01:10:15PM +0000, Nick Clifton wrote: > Hi Daniel, > > >> Please just let gdb ignore such entries with PC=0. > > > > No. A number of embedded targets _do_ have code at PC=0 - including > > some of the simulator targets (I think), and Harvard architecture > > processors. Emitting garbage line info that says code is there is a > > bug in the debug info producers, not the consumer. > > > > GDB already has several hacks to ignore info at 0. I strongly oppose > > adding more; as GNU ld gets better at producing correct info the > > existing ones should be removed. > > Fair enough. > > Is there a way to tell GDB that a particular line table entry is > invalid ? Or is the linker supposed to delete such entries entirely > from the line table ? I believe the latter. Can anyone see a use of line table entries which do not correspond to used code? I can't think of an example. -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer
- Previous message (by thread): [BUG] Regression in 2.14.90 (relative to 2.13.90)
- Next message (by thread): [BUG] Regression in 2.14.90 (relative to 2.13.90)
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Binutils mailing list