http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55059
--- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill <jason at gcc dot gnu.org> 2013-01-28 01:54:25 UTC --- (In reply to comment #3) > If we change gdb to cope with this, I think the effect will be to undo what > the patches here were attempting to accomplish. I believe the patch was trying to avoid treating a partial definition as a full definition when there's a full definition of the class in another CU. If there's only the partial definition, the best we can do is to use that. That seems better to me than the situation we had before.
