On Feb  9 18:15, Achim Gratz wrote:
> Corinna Vinschen writes:
> > I think it's important to keep the information in sync while building
> > the packages.  A later rebase will break the connection between debug
> > symbols and runtime symbols as well, obviously.
> 
> Obviously?  I have no indication that the debug information is damaged
> once it's been stripped off into a separate file.  Which may be a hint
> on what rebase might do wrong.

What I mean is this.  If the debug info file does not refer to the
same addresses than the file in memory, then GDB doesn't resolve the
symbols correctly.

> > Maybe we should think of rebasing the actual binaries as well as their
> > debugging counterparts to keep everything in sync, but that's a bit
> > much effort...
> 
> I may not understand what is really going on, but the way I see it,
> rebase does exactly that while the debug information is still part of
> the object file.  It seems to do something extra or wrong, since objcopy
> will the not be able to copy out that information.  Looking with objdump
> reveals the section is still there ans has contents, but it doesn't get
> associated with the code in the correct manner anymore.

I'm not an expert on this stuff either, so I can just assume that the
rebasing doesn't catch the debug info and that the debug info then
points into nirvana.  I also don't know if there's a way around that.

Would you mind to discuss your problem on the binutils mailing list?
Hopefully they know if there's a way which preserves the info so that
GDB doesn't fish in muddy waters.


Thanks,
Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Maintainer                 cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat