public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Bug c++/12471] New: functions shown as ?? in gdb
@ 2003-10-01 2:31 gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org
2003-10-01 2:36 ` [Bug c++/12471] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (13 more replies)
0 siblings, 14 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2003-10-01 2:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12471
Summary: functions shown as ?? in gdb
Product: gcc
Version: 3.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: xu at cs dot wisc dot edu
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC build triplet: sparc-sun-solaris2.8
GCC host triplet: sparc-sun-solaris2.8
GCC target triplet: sparc-sun-solaris2.8
If you compile the following simple program and debug it with gdb 5.3
64bit version, everything works fine except that when you press ^C and stop in
the gdb prompt and do a "where" command. You will not see the function names of
the c++ library. I have tried other calls and gdb was able to show function
name of /usr/lib/libc.so, for instance. I am not sure this is a bug of gcc or
gdb, I shall report to both.
Environment:
System: SunOS pinot.cs.wisc.edu 5.8 Generic_108528-23 sun4u sparc SUNW,Sun-Fire-880
Architecture: sun4
host: sparc-sun-solaris2.8
build: sparc-sun-solaris2.8
target: sparc-sun-solaris2.8
configured with: ../gcc-3.3/configure --prefix=/s/gcc-3.3 --enable-threads --enable-shared
How-To-Repeat:
For the following code:
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
main() {
cout << "helo" << endl;
for(;;) {
cout << "a";
}
}
compile with
g++ -g -m64 -mcpu=v9 -ldl test.cc
debug with
gdb a.out
in gdb
run
^c
where
------- Additional Comments From xu at cs dot wisc dot edu 2003-10-01 02:30 -------
Fix:
if you know, let me know.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/12471] functions shown as ?? in gdb
2003-10-01 2:31 [Bug c++/12471] New: functions shown as ?? in gdb gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2003-10-01 2:36 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2003-10-01 12:55 ` bangerth at dealii dot org
` (12 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2003-10-01 2:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12471
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
------- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2003-10-01 02:36 -------
Can you provide the output of the where command?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/12471] functions shown as ?? in gdb
2003-10-01 2:31 [Bug c++/12471] New: functions shown as ?? in gdb gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org
2003-10-01 2:36 ` [Bug c++/12471] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2003-10-01 12:55 ` bangerth at dealii dot org
2003-10-01 14:25 ` mxu at cae dot wisc dot edu
` (11 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: bangerth at dealii dot org @ 2003-10-01 12:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12471
------- Additional Comments From bangerth at dealii dot org 2003-10-01 12:55 -------
And as another question: what happens if you use -ggdb instead of -g?
W.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/12471] functions shown as ?? in gdb
2003-10-01 2:31 [Bug c++/12471] New: functions shown as ?? in gdb gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org
2003-10-01 2:36 ` [Bug c++/12471] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2003-10-01 12:55 ` bangerth at dealii dot org
@ 2003-10-01 14:25 ` mxu at cae dot wisc dot edu
2003-10-01 14:27 ` mxu at cae dot wisc dot edu
` (10 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: mxu at cae dot wisc dot edu @ 2003-10-01 14:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12471
------- Additional Comments From mxu at cae dot wisc dot edu 2003-10-01 14:25 -------
Subject: Re: functions shown as ?? in gdb
pinskia,
Thanks a lot for the quick response!
Here is the output:
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa^C
Program received signal SIGINT, Interrupt.
0x7fffffff7fa76dc0 in ?? () from /s/gcc-3.3/sun4x_58/lib/sparcv9/libstdc++.so.5
(gdb) where
#0 0x7fffffff7fa76dc0 in ?? ()
from /s/gcc-3.3/sun4x_58/lib/sparcv9/libstdc++.so.5
#1 0x7fffffff7f9608ac in ?? ()
from /s/gcc-3.3/sun4x_58/lib/sparcv9/libstdc++.so.5
#2 0x7fffffff7f960f8c in ?? ()
from /s/gcc-3.3/sun4x_58/lib/sparcv9/libstdc++.so.5
#3 0x0000000100000e50 in main () at test.cc:15
-Min
On Wed, 01 Oct 2003 pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote :
> PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12471
>
>
> pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
>
> What |Removed |Added
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
>
>
> ------- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2003-10-01 02:36 -------
> Can you provide the output of the where command?
>
>
>
> ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
> You reported the bug, or are watching the reporter.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/12471] functions shown as ?? in gdb
2003-10-01 2:31 [Bug c++/12471] New: functions shown as ?? in gdb gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2003-10-01 14:25 ` mxu at cae dot wisc dot edu
@ 2003-10-01 14:27 ` mxu at cae dot wisc dot edu
2003-10-01 14:36 ` bangerth at dealii dot org
` (9 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: mxu at cae dot wisc dot edu @ 2003-10-01 14:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12471
------- Additional Comments From mxu at cae dot wisc dot edu 2003-10-01 14:27 -------
Subject: Re: functions shown as ?? in gdb
bangerth,
Thanks a lot for the quick reply. Everything was the same if
I changed to use -ggdb instead of -g.
-Min
On Wed, 01 Oct 2003 bangerth at dealii dot org wrote :
> PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12471
>
>
>
> ------- Additional Comments From bangerth at dealii dot org 2003-10-01 12:55 -------
> And as another question: what happens if you use -ggdb instead of -g?
> W.
>
>
>
> ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
> You reported the bug, or are watching the reporter.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/12471] functions shown as ?? in gdb
2003-10-01 2:31 [Bug c++/12471] New: functions shown as ?? in gdb gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2003-10-01 14:27 ` mxu at cae dot wisc dot edu
@ 2003-10-01 14:36 ` bangerth at dealii dot org
2003-10-01 14:43 ` mxu at cae dot wisc dot edu
` (8 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: bangerth at dealii dot org @ 2003-10-01 14:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12471
------- Additional Comments From bangerth at dealii dot org 2003-10-01 14:36 -------
Stack traces look like this is either the library wasn't compiled with -g,
or if they were stripped. Not having such a system at hand, anything more
from my side would be speculation, though.
W.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/12471] functions shown as ?? in gdb
2003-10-01 2:31 [Bug c++/12471] New: functions shown as ?? in gdb gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2003-10-01 14:36 ` bangerth at dealii dot org
@ 2003-10-01 14:43 ` mxu at cae dot wisc dot edu
2003-10-01 15:11 ` [Bug target/12471] [sparc] no backtrace into libstdc++ possible bangerth at dealii dot org
` (7 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: mxu at cae dot wisc dot edu @ 2003-10-01 14:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12471
------- Additional Comments From mxu at cae dot wisc dot edu 2003-10-01 14:43 -------
Subject: Re: functions shown as ?? in gdb
bangerth,
The lib is not striped:
file /s/gcc-3.3/sun4x_58/lib/sparcv9/libstdc++.so.5.0.4
/s/gcc-3.3/sun4x_58/lib/sparcv9/libstdc++.so.5.0.4: ELF 64-bit MSB dynamic
lib SPARCV9 Version 1, dynamically linked, not stripped
nm it shows:
[4606] | 295956| 8|FUNC |WEAK |0 |434
|_ZNKSt9basic_iosI
cSt11char_traitsIcEE5rdbufEv
[4702] | 297504| 60|FUNC |WEAK |0 |456
|_ZNKSt9basic_iosI
cSt11char_traitsIcEE5widenEc
[3958] | 297440| 64|FUNC |WEAK |0 |455
|_ZNKSt9basic_iosI
cSt11char_traitsIcEE6narrowEcc
[3561] | 295892| 8|FUNC |WEAK |0 |430
|_ZNKSt9basic_iosI
cSt11char_traitsIcEE7rdstateEv
Does this indicate it's compile with -g?
In fact, this problem started on my application library which
I compiled with -g. The library is then dlopened.
-Min
On Wed, 01 Oct 2003 bangerth at dealii dot org wrote :
> PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12471
>
>
>
> ------- Additional Comments From bangerth at dealii dot org 2003-10-01 14:36 -------
> Stack traces look like this is either the library wasn't compiled with -g,
> or if they were stripped. Not having such a system at hand, anything more
> from my side would be speculation, though.
>
> W.
>
>
>
> ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
> You reported the bug, or are watching the reporter.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/12471] [sparc] no backtrace into libstdc++ possible
2003-10-01 2:31 [Bug c++/12471] New: functions shown as ?? in gdb gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2003-10-01 14:43 ` mxu at cae dot wisc dot edu
@ 2003-10-01 15:11 ` bangerth at dealii dot org
2003-10-03 4:30 ` [Bug target/12471] " ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (6 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: bangerth at dealii dot org @ 2003-10-01 15:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12471
bangerth at dealii dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Component|c++ |target
Summary|functions shown as ?? in gdb|[sparc] no backtrace into
| |libstdc++ possible
------- Additional Comments From bangerth at dealii dot org 2003-10-01 15:11 -------
It _could_ indicate the libstdc++ was built without -g. It may
just as well be a gdb problem. But that's just silly
speculation, someone with a sparc system needs to look at this PR.
W.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/12471] no backtrace into libstdc++ possible
2003-10-01 2:31 [Bug c++/12471] New: functions shown as ?? in gdb gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2003-10-01 15:11 ` [Bug target/12471] [sparc] no backtrace into libstdc++ possible bangerth at dealii dot org
@ 2003-10-03 4:30 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
2003-10-03 4:30 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (5 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2003-10-03 4:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12471
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org |org
Status|WAITING |ASSIGNED
------- Additional Comments From ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2003-10-03 04:30 -------
I'll investigate.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/12471] no backtrace into libstdc++ possible
2003-10-01 2:31 [Bug c++/12471] New: functions shown as ?? in gdb gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (7 preceding siblings ...)
2003-10-03 4:30 ` [Bug target/12471] " ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2003-10-03 4:30 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
2003-10-03 6:47 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (4 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2003-10-03 4:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12471
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last reconfirmed|0000-00-00 00:00:00 |2003-10-03 04:30:11
date| |
------- Additional Comments From ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2003-10-03 04:30 -------
This is confirmed with all GCC versions I tested (2.95.3, 3.2.3, 3.3).
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/12471] no backtrace into libstdc++ possible
2003-10-01 2:31 [Bug c++/12471] New: functions shown as ?? in gdb gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (8 preceding siblings ...)
2003-10-03 4:30 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2003-10-03 6:47 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
2003-10-03 14:27 ` mxu at cae dot wisc dot edu
` (3 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2003-10-03 6:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12471
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|ASSIGNED |RESOLVED
Resolution| |INVALID
------- Additional Comments From ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2003-10-03 06:47 -------
This is a GDB 5.x bug (see PR 1044 in the GDB bug database). Here's the session
with dbx:
(dbx) where
=>[1] _libc_write(0x1, 0xff240f9c, 0x400, 0xff23e164, 0xff20f014, 0xff383280),
at 0xff21d238
[2] _xflsbuf(0xff23e174, 0xff24139c, 0xff23dce8, 0xff23e164, 0xff20f014,
0xff00), at 0xff20f128
[3] _flsbuf(0x61, 0xff23e174, 0x61, 0x4, 0x0, 0xff3d6a18), at 0xff20c658
[4] _fwrite_unlocked(0xffbff99f, 0x1, 0x1, 0xff23e174, 0x0, 0xff3836f8), at
0xff2108fc
[5] fwrite(0xffbff99f, 0x1, 0x1, 0xff23e174, 0x0, 0xff333f3c), at 0xff210430
[6]
_ZNSt13basic_filebufIcSt11char_traitsIcEE22_M_convert_to_externalEPciRiS4_(0xff383938,
0xffbff99f, 0x1, 0xffbff9a4, 0xffbff9a0, 0x10), at 0xff3379e8
[7]
_ZNSt13basic_filebufIcSt11char_traitsIcEE18_M_really_overflowEi(0xffffffff, 0x1,
0x0, 0x0, 0x0, 0x0), at 0xff3377a8
[8] _ZNSt13basic_filebufIcSt11char_traitsIcEE8overflowEi(0xff383938, 0x61,
0x0, 0x1002, 0xff383938, 0xff383280), at 0xff3376b8
[9] _ZNSt15basic_streambufIcSt11char_traitsIcEE6xsputnEPKci(0x0, 0x10ce9, 0x1,
0x1002, 0x20fa0, 0xff383280), at 0xff357460
[10] _ZNSo5writeEPKci(0x20fa0, 0x10ce8, 0x1, 0x7efefeff, 0x81010100, 0xff00),
at 0xff352340
[11] _ZStlsISt11char_traitsIcEERSt13basic_ostreamIcT_ES5_PKc(0x1, 0x10ce8,
0xff3846d4, 0x4, 0x0, 0xff3d6a18), at 0xff352ac8
[12] main(0x1, 0xffbffc6c, 0xffbffc74, 0x20f98, 0x0, 0x0), at 0x10b5c
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/12471] no backtrace into libstdc++ possible
2003-10-01 2:31 [Bug c++/12471] New: functions shown as ?? in gdb gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (9 preceding siblings ...)
2003-10-03 6:47 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2003-10-03 14:27 ` mxu at cae dot wisc dot edu
2003-10-03 14:45 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: mxu at cae dot wisc dot edu @ 2003-10-03 14:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12471
------- Additional Comments From mxu at cae dot wisc dot edu 2003-10-03 14:27 -------
Subject: Re: no backtrace into libstdc++ possible
ebotcazou,
Thanks for investigate. You mean gdb 6.x will fix it? I though
gdb and dbx don't compatible, you mean I can use dbx to debug
gcc compiled program?
Thanks,
-Min
On Fri, 03 Oct 2003 ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote :
> PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12471
>
>
> ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
>
> What |Removed |Added
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Status|ASSIGNED |RESOLVED
> Resolution| |INVALID
>
>
> ------- Additional Comments From ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2003-10-03 06:47 -------
> This is a GDB 5.x bug (see PR 1044 in the GDB bug database). Here's the session
> with dbx:
>
> (dbx) where
> =>[1] _libc_write(0x1, 0xff240f9c, 0x400, 0xff23e164, 0xff20f014, 0xff383280),
> at 0xff21d238
> [2] _xflsbuf(0xff23e174, 0xff24139c, 0xff23dce8, 0xff23e164, 0xff20f014,
> 0xff00), at 0xff20f128
> [3] _flsbuf(0x61, 0xff23e174, 0x61, 0x4, 0x0, 0xff3d6a18), at 0xff20c658
> [4] _fwrite_unlocked(0xffbff99f, 0x1, 0x1, 0xff23e174, 0x0, 0xff3836f8), at
> 0xff2108fc
> [5] fwrite(0xffbff99f, 0x1, 0x1, 0xff23e174, 0x0, 0xff333f3c), at 0xff210430
> [6]
> _ZNSt13basic_filebufIcSt11char_traitsIcEE22_M_convert_to_externalEPciRiS4_(0xff383938,
> 0xffbff99f, 0x1, 0xffbff9a4, 0xffbff9a0, 0x10), at 0xff3379e8
> [7]
> _ZNSt13basic_filebufIcSt11char_traitsIcEE18_M_really_overflowEi(0xffffffff, 0x1,
> 0x0, 0x0, 0x0, 0x0), at 0xff3377a8
> [8] _ZNSt13basic_filebufIcSt11char_traitsIcEE8overflowEi(0xff383938, 0x61,
> 0x0, 0x1002, 0xff383938, 0xff383280), at 0xff3376b8
> [9] _ZNSt15basic_streambufIcSt11char_traitsIcEE6xsputnEPKci(0x0, 0x10ce9, 0x1,
> 0x1002, 0x20fa0, 0xff383280), at 0xff357460
> [10] _ZNSo5writeEPKci(0x20fa0, 0x10ce8, 0x1, 0x7efefeff, 0x81010100, 0xff00),
> at 0xff352340
> [11] _ZStlsISt11char_traitsIcEERSt13basic_ostreamIcT_ES5_PKc(0x1, 0x10ce8,
> 0xff3846d4, 0x4, 0x0, 0xff3d6a18), at 0xff352ac8
> [12] main(0x1, 0xffbffc6c, 0xffbffc74, 0x20f98, 0x0, 0x0), at 0x10b5c
>
>
>
>
> ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
> You reported the bug, or are watching the reporter.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/12471] no backtrace into libstdc++ possible
2003-10-01 2:31 [Bug c++/12471] New: functions shown as ?? in gdb gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (10 preceding siblings ...)
2003-10-03 14:27 ` mxu at cae dot wisc dot edu
@ 2003-10-03 14:45 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
2003-10-04 5:01 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
2003-10-04 17:06 ` mxu at cae dot wisc dot edu
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2003-10-03 14:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12471
------- Additional Comments From ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2003-10-03 14:45 -------
I'm not a GDB developer so I can't really answer to either question. But GDB and
DBX are supposed to speak the same base language (STABS on SPARC, DWARF2 on
SPARC64) so it could be possible to debug GCC-compiled code with DBX.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/12471] no backtrace into libstdc++ possible
2003-10-01 2:31 [Bug c++/12471] New: functions shown as ?? in gdb gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (11 preceding siblings ...)
2003-10-03 14:45 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2003-10-04 5:01 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
2003-10-04 17:06 ` mxu at cae dot wisc dot edu
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2003-10-04 5:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12471
------- Additional Comments From ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2003-10-04 05:01 -------
I just tested gdb 5.3.93_2003-10-04-cvs and it's better:
(gdb) where
#0 0xff352334 in std::ostream::write(char const*, int) (this=0x20fa0,
__s=0x10ce8 "a", __n=1)
at
/opt/build/gcc-3.3-objdir/sparc-sun-solaris2.8/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/basic_ios.h:295
#1 0xff352ad0 in std::basic_ostream<char, std::char_traits<char> >&
std::operator<< <std::char_traits<char> >(std::basic_ostream<char,
std::char_traits<char> >&, char const*) (__out=@0x20fa0, __s=0x10ce8 "a")
at
/opt/build/gcc-3.3-objdir/sparc-sun-solaris2.8/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/ostream.tcc:648
#2 0x00010b64 in main () at test.cpp:8
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug target/12471] no backtrace into libstdc++ possible
2003-10-01 2:31 [Bug c++/12471] New: functions shown as ?? in gdb gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (12 preceding siblings ...)
2003-10-04 5:01 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2003-10-04 17:06 ` mxu at cae dot wisc dot edu
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: mxu at cae dot wisc dot edu @ 2003-10-04 17:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12471
------- Additional Comments From mxu at cae dot wisc dot edu 2003-10-04 17:06 -------
Subject: Re: no backtrace into libstdc++ possible
ebotcazou,
Thanks I will try that.
-Min
On Sat, 04 Oct 2003 ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote :
> PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12471
>
>
>
> ------- Additional Comments From ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2003-10-04 05:01 -------
> I just tested gdb 5.3.93_2003-10-04-cvs and it's better:
>
> (gdb) where
> #0 0xff352334 in std::ostream::write(char const*, int) (this=0x20fa0,
> __s=0x10ce8 "a", __n=1)
> at
> /opt/build/gcc-3.3-objdir/sparc-sun-solaris2.8/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/basic_ios.h:295
> #1 0xff352ad0 in std::basic_ostream<char, std::char_traits<char> >&
> std::operator<< <std::char_traits<char> >(std::basic_ostream<char,
> std::char_traits<char> >&, char const*) (__out=@0x20fa0, __s=0x10ce8 "a")
> at
> /opt/build/gcc-3.3-objdir/sparc-sun-solaris2.8/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/ostream.tcc:648
> #2 0x00010b64 in main () at test.cpp:8
>
>
>
>
> ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
> You reported the bug, or are watching the reporter.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2003-10-04 17:06 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2003-10-01 2:31 [Bug c++/12471] New: functions shown as ?? in gdb gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org
2003-10-01 2:36 ` [Bug c++/12471] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2003-10-01 12:55 ` bangerth at dealii dot org
2003-10-01 14:25 ` mxu at cae dot wisc dot edu
2003-10-01 14:27 ` mxu at cae dot wisc dot edu
2003-10-01 14:36 ` bangerth at dealii dot org
2003-10-01 14:43 ` mxu at cae dot wisc dot edu
2003-10-01 15:11 ` [Bug target/12471] [sparc] no backtrace into libstdc++ possible bangerth at dealii dot org
2003-10-03 4:30 ` [Bug target/12471] " ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
2003-10-03 4:30 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
2003-10-03 6:47 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
2003-10-03 14:27 ` mxu at cae dot wisc dot edu
2003-10-03 14:45 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
2003-10-04 5:01 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
2003-10-04 17:06 ` mxu at cae dot wisc dot edu
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).