From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18356 invoked by alias); 16 Nov 2009 15:38:01 -0000 Received: (qmail 18310 invoked by uid 48); 16 Nov 2009 15:37:45 -0000 Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2009 15:38:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20091116153745.18309.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug target/41473] [4.5 Regression] dsymutil "Assertion failed ..." In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr" Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2009-11/txt/msg01302.txt.bz2 ------- Comment #13 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2009-11-16 15:37 ------- (In reply to comment #12) > Can code in comment 11 be converted into a test case that can be run > through dsymutil without requiring FSF gcc to be installed? If so, please open > a radar report with that information. Jack, I am not sure to understand what you ask for. My knowledge (rather my ignorance!-) of C makes me unable to say if there is anything non standard in the code in comment 11. Let me repeat that the failures to use dsymutil on the executable file is specific to gcc 4.5 and cannot repeated with the gcc shipped by Apple nor with any gcc version I have pre-VTA merge. My uneducated guess is that post-VTA merge gcc sometimes puts some stuff in the executable files that trigger the assertion in dsymutil. In my opinion only those knowing what they are doing with the dwarf information can tell us where to look to go further. Note that I have forgotten to mention that further reducing the test makes the dsymutil failure to disappear (I did not tried to reduced the different switches). -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41473