--- Comment #6 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-10 07:28 ---
It doesn't work on gcc.dg/pch/valid-1b.c since it explicitly tests -g vs -g0:
I don't think valid-1b.c is valid any more in general, You have to supply -g
to get a valid PCH now that works with -g.
--
--- Comment #7 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2008-08-10 16:56 ---
(In reply to comment #6)
It doesn't work on gcc.dg/pch/valid-1b.c since it explicitly tests -g vs -g0:
I don't think valid-1b.c is valid any more in general, You have to supply -g
to get a valid PCH now that
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.4.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37033
--- Comment #5 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2008-08-09 15:15 ---
It doesn't work on gcc.dg/pch/valid-1b.c since it explicitly tests -g vs -g0:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] testsuite]$ cat gcc.dg/pch/valid-1b.c
/* { dg-options -I. -Winvalid-pch -g0 } */
#include valid-1b.h
int x;
[EMAIL
--- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2008-08-07 18:58 ---
Created an attachment (id=16037)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16037action=view)
A testcase
/export/build/gnu/gcc-work/build-x86_64-linux/gcc/xgcc
--- Comment #2 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2008-08-07 19:09 ---
The problem is -E never generates any debug info. So __GCC_HAVE_DWARF2_CFI_ASM
won't be defined for -E and PCH gets a mismatch.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37033
--- Comment #3 from rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-07 20:07 ---
Subject: Bug 37033
Author: rth
Date: Thu Aug 7 20:06:36 2008
New Revision: 138850
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=138850
Log:
PR debug/37033
* gcc.c (cpp_options): Pass along -g*.
--- Comment #4 from rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-07 20:11 ---
Fixed.
--
rth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
