From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21951 invoked by alias); 25 Jun 2007 23:40:51 -0000 Received: (qmail 21933 invoked by uid 22791); 25 Jun 2007 23:40:50 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from NaN.false.org (HELO nan.false.org) (208.75.86.248) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Mon, 25 Jun 2007 23:40:48 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D9DCE98306; Mon, 25 Jun 2007 23:40:46 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (22.svnf5.xdsl.nauticom.net [209.195.183.55]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD44F982FD; Mon, 25 Jun 2007 23:40:46 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1I2yAJ-0004eI-Mz; Mon, 25 Jun 2007 19:40:15 -0400 Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2007 23:40:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Pedro Alves Cc: insight@sourceware.org, gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [patch ping^2] suppress annoying warnings about cygwin1.dbg Message-ID: <20070625234015.GA17640@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Pedro Alves , insight@sourceware.org, gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <46262D3A.8B1A0D15@dessent.net> <20070418150137.GA7338@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> <46263710.D9755DAD@dessent.net> <462639F3.FBCF4675@dessent.net> <46264A56.BA86EED7@dessent.net> <4638AB6B.5AA94B26@dessent.net> <46803846.F99470AE@dessent.net> <46804DAD.4020309@portugalmail.pt> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <46804DAD.4020309@portugalmail.pt> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.15 (2007-04-09) Mailing-List: contact insight-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: insight-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2007-q2/txt/msg00089.txt.bz2 On Tue, Jun 26, 2007 at 12:20:13AM +0100, Pedro Alves wrote: > I think the changes to make win32 use solib-target.c at least will > turn this into a different warning, if they don't remove it. I'm > not familiar with the separate debug info mechanism in gdb, but to > me it sounds we should understand the reasons for the warnings and > fix it there. I mean, why is it that these warnings don't happen > on other targets? Why is gdb looking for loadable sections in a > debug info only file? There are loadable sections in an ELF debug-only file; they all have type NOBITS instead of PROGBITS, but are otherwise unchanged. I'm going to make a wild guess here that says you can't do that in PE-COFF, so the text section is actually missing. So probably we should figure out whether we're loading a debug-info-only file at this point, and not issue those warnings. Or else remove the warnings entirely. The redirection to /dev/null is silly and should go away, by the way, so relying on it isn't the right fix. I don't remember if my recently posted WIP patch removed it. I think it did for most but not all cases. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery