From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4279 invoked by alias); 19 Aug 2003 13:28:38 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 4259 invoked from network); 19 Aug 2003 13:28:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 19 Aug 2003 13:28:37 -0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.20 #1 (Debian)) id 19p6XN-0004so-AH for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2003 09:28:37 -0400 Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2003 13:28:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: More debug info test directories? Message-ID: <20030819132837.GA18748@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: gdb@sources.redhat.com References: <3F42250B.7080304@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3F42250B.7080304@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i X-SW-Source: 2003-08/txt/msg00216.txt.bz2 On Tue, Aug 19, 2003 at 09:24:27AM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote: > Hello, > > The gdb.stabs directory, while weird :-^, is probably a good unit test. > What do people think of additional debug info directories vis: > > gdb.dw2 > gdb.dw1 > > (I'm desperate for better names :-) that contain files of raw debug > info. It would let people test the various readers without needing a > corresponding compiler. > > thoughts? Absolutely a good idea. What do you think about letting these use the .inc files in gdb.asm? Writing raw dwarf2 could require arch hooks, unless you want to point all offsets at constant addresses instead of at a variable's actual location. For instance some architectures need to use .word vs .quad. -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer