From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Daniel Berlin To: Bill Nottingham Cc: dan@cgsoftware.com, Mark Mitchell , wilson@cygnus.com, schwab@suse.de, gcc@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: Bootstrap failure of gcc-ss-20010409 in ia64 Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2001 21:46:00 -0000 Message-id: References: <20010411183411J.mitchell@codesourcery.com> <20010411211618B.mitchell@codesourcery.com> <200104121926.f3CJQj909281@porkchop.redhat.com> <200104130407.f3D473o14019@devserv.devel.redhat.com> X-SW-Source: 2001-04/msg00583.html Bill Nottingham writes: > (restating some stuff from private mail) > > Daniel Berlin >Umm, actually, are you sure you applied the patch? > > > >The abort location should be moved down a few lines, yet it's claiming > >an ICE at the exact same location it did before (there is no other > >abort() in that routine). > > Yup, I did apply the patch; I can confirm with this patch in head > I can build libstdc++-v3 OK; but it still fails for me on the > 3.0 branch in the same place. Hmmmm. Odd. Can you capture all the output of a gdb session ("script", for instance, would be fine for this kind of capturing) that just loads cc1, runs it on the preprocessed file till the abort, goes up to the add_abstract_origin frame, runs info locals, and send it to me? I should be able to determine what's up from that. The only thought that comes to me is that either the context is wrong on the generated die (which i know, is the part i need to fix), and for some reason it can find it on the branch, but not the head, or that decl_ultimate_origin is giving us a NULL decl, screwing us since we'll just not generate a die, even if we tell it to. > > Bill -- I can levitate birds. No one cares.