This is the mail archive of the crossgcc@sourceware.cygnus.com mailing list for the crossgcc project.

See the CrossGCC FAQ for lots more infromation.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: stabs+ vs dwarf-2

To: Art Berggreen <art at acc dot com>
Subject: Re: stabs+ vs dwarf-2
From: Richard Earnshaw <rearnsha at arm dot com>
Date: Wed, 10 May 2000 19:37:55 +0100
Cc: crossgcc at sourceware dot cygnus dot com, philip dot blundel at pobox dot com
Cc: rearnsha at arm dot com
Organization: ARM Ltd.
Reply-To: rearnsha at arm dot com

> 
> Are there any issues using stabs+ rather than dwarf-2 debugging info
> with GDB?
> 
> We are using an arm-elf build of GCC which defaults to dwarf-2.  But gas
> appears to want (need?) stabs directives to perform source code
> inclusion in assembly listing files (-ahls).  If I tell GCC to produce
> stabs+ directives, I get the desired assembly listing, but was wondering
> if there is a downside.  The target is a custom board with no formal
> OS.  GCC version 2.95.2, gas version 2.9.5, gdb version 4.18.
> 
> Art
> 


I think you need a later version of gas that properly supports ARM/ELF.  
Try getting a snapshot of the upcoming binutils-2.10 release.  Phil, are 
these available on sourceware?

R.


------
Want more information?  See the CrossGCC FAQ, http://www.objsw.com/CrossGCC/
Want to unsubscribe? Send a note to crossgcc-unsubscribe@sourceware.cygnus.com

Follow-Ups:
- Re: stabs+ vs dwarf-2
  - From: Philip Blundell

References:
- stabs+ vs dwarf-2
  - From: Art Berggreen

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]