This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.cygnus.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: GDB 5.0 2000-03-05
On Mon, Mar 06, 2000 at 09:08:48AM -0800, Jim Kingdon wrote:
> > Linux people are looking for something better than gdb 4.17.0.1x to
> > debug Linuxthreads. It will be very disappointing if 5.0 fails to do
> > so.
>
> True, it would be disappointing. Anyway, here is my attempt to
> summarize what is up with Linux (based of course on
> http://sourceware.cygnus.com/gdb/issues50.html ). In case it isn't
> obvious, it is up to Linux folks (HJ/JimB/MarkK/me/whoever to) get
> fixes checked in, we don't want to keep "5.0 release central" (Andrew)
> waiting.
I may be able to spend sometime on it next week.
>
> * Spurious SIGTRAP bug. No one has diagnosed this bug as far as I
> know, although JimB was working on it. This one is probably the most
> serious.
Do you have URL for the bug report.
>
> * lin-thread cannot handle thread exit. Should we think about
> disabling lin-thread in favor of linux-thread for 5.0? Or to put it
> another way, has lin-thread gotten enough testing? There might
I don't think so.
> be other variations on this theme, such as a note in the
> documentation about how deleting/renaming libthread_db might be a
> workaround, although I'm not sure that really helps much.
I think it is a good ide for 5.0.
>
> * dlclose(). Any reactions MarkK? Or JimB? Note that issues50.html
> points to a withdrawn patch; the most recent is:
> http://sourceware.cygnus.com/ml/gdb-patches/2000-q1/msg00454.html
>
> * 2.0.x kernel patch. MarkK? issues50.html points to the latest
> patch on this as far as I know:
> http://sourceware.cygnus.com/ml/gdb-patches/1999-q4/msg00294.html
>
> * hardware watchpoints. Does not strike me as important for 5.0 as
> the above, but if someone has time, should be worth a review. It is
> nice to see some patches out there.
I have some old patches for it. I will work on it when I find time
next week.
H.J.