>> However I am sure I'm not the only one encountering this issue.
>> Perhaps I should build my own GDB binary instead, so I have more
>> understanding of what is going on.
>
> I built myself a gdb-7.0.1 release and it still output the warnings
There is a report on the GDB mailing list with someon
> However I am sure I'm not the only one encountering this issue.
> Perhaps I should build my own GDB binary instead, so I have more
> understanding of what is going on.
I built myself a gdb-7.0.1 release and it still output the warnings
-
Ozkan Sezer wrote:
>> Also previously it was not possible to debug 64bits binary using GDB
>> until this release.
>> Tried gdb_20091224.tar.gz also was impossible to get any debugging info out.
>>
I mean previous gdb were somewhat broken and unable to debug app that
crashed and got empty back
> Also previously it was not possible to debug 64bits binary using GDB
> until this release.
> Tried gdb_20091224.tar.gz also was impossible to get any debugging info out.
>
It was built from gdb CVS HEAD (their development version)
and yes the gdb.exe was stripped. Maybe the development
version
Chris Sutcliffe wrote:
>> Sorry I don't but my compiler is pretty customized I guess it have
>> something to do with that.
>> Its a multi-lib patched gcc-4_4-branch a cross compiler, don't know if
>> it something to do with the config option --with-stabs ?
>> But how come you havent been able to en
> Sorry I don't but my compiler is pretty customized I guess it have
> something to do with that.
> Its a multi-lib patched gcc-4_4-branch a cross compiler, don't know if
> it something to do with the config option --with-stabs ?
> But how come you havent been able to encounter the problem, I downl
2010/1/8 Chris Sutcliffe :
> Hi Kai,
>
>> yes this bug I encounter some time ago, too. It is related to DLL files
>> not having any debugging information but are shown in backtrace. Here it
>> warns once about psymtab != symtab and code in gdb fix it afterwards. IMHO
>> this warning is simply prett
Hi Kai,
> yes this bug I encounter some time ago, too. It is related to DLL files
> not having any debugging information but are shown in backtrace. Here it
> warns once about psymtab != symtab and code in gdb fix it afterwards. IMHO
> this warning is simply pretty bogus here, or the DLL loader sh
> yes this bug I encounter some time ago, too. It is related to DLL files
> not having any debugging information but are shown in backtrace. Here it
> warns once about psymtab != symtab and code in gdb fix it afterwards. IMHO
> this warning is simply pretty bogus here, or the DLL loader should
"t66...@gmail.com" wrote on 08.01.2010 15:10:30:
> Chris Sutcliffe wrote:
> >>> Previously using GNU gdb 6.8
> >>> There were no such annoying warnings.
> >>>
> >> Correct, there have been several posts about this on the GDB mailing
> >> list. AFAIK, it has something do with the pretty printers
Chris Sutcliffe wrote:
>>> Previously using GNU gdb 6.8
>>> There were no such annoying warnings.
>>>
>> Correct, there have been several posts about this on the GDB mailing
>> list. AFAIK, it has something do with the pretty printers that were
>> introduced in 7.x. I've sent an email to t
>> Previously using GNU gdb 6.8
>> There were no such annoying warnings.
>
> Correct, there have been several posts about this on the GDB mailing
> list. AFAIK, it has something do with the pretty printers that were
> introduced in 7.x. I've sent an email to the GDB mailing list to see
> if there
>> Yes, if you do a Google for it, you'll get an explanation.
>>
> Previously using GNU gdb 6.8
> There were no such annoying warnings.
Correct, there have been several posts about this on the GDB mailing
list. AFAIK, it has something do with the pretty printers that were
introduced in 7.x. I've
Chris Sutcliffe wrote:
>> warning: (Internal error: pc 0xa263bff in read in psymtab, but not in
>> symtab.)
>> is this normal?
>>
>
> Yes, if you do a Google for it, you'll get an explanation.
>
> Chris
>
>
Previously using GNU gdb 6.8
There were no such annoying warnings.
---
t66...@gmail.com wrote:
> Chris Sutcliffe wrote:
>> I've uploaded 32- and 64-bit native builds of GDB for mingw-w64 built
>> from the vanilla GNU GDB 7.0.1 sources:
>>
>> 32-bit:
>> http://sourceforge.net/projects/mingw-w64/files/External%20binary%20packages%20%28Win64%20hosted%29/gdb/i686-w64-min
Chris Sutcliffe wrote:
> I've uploaded 32- and 64-bit native builds of GDB for mingw-w64 built
> from the vanilla GNU GDB 7.0.1 sources:
>
> 32-bit:
> http://sourceforge.net/projects/mingw-w64/files/External%20binary%20packages%20%28Win64%20hosted%29/gdb/i686-w64-mingw32-gdb-7.0.1-4.tar.bz2/downlo
On 1/7/2010 23:00, Chris Sutcliffe wrote:
> I've uploaded 32- and 64-bit native builds of GDB for mingw-w64 built
> from the vanilla GNU GDB 7.0.1 sources:
>
> 32-bit:
> http://sourceforge.net/projects/mingw-w64/files/External%20binary%20packages%20%28Win64%20hosted%29/gdb/i686-w64-mingw32-gdb-7.0
I've uploaded 32- and 64-bit native builds of GDB for mingw-w64 built
from the vanilla GNU GDB 7.0.1 sources:
32-bit:
http://sourceforge.net/projects/mingw-w64/files/External%20binary%20packages%20%28Win64%20hosted%29/gdb/i686-w64-mingw32-gdb-7.0.1-4.tar.bz2/download
64-bit:
http://sourceforge.n
18 matches
Mail list logo
