This is the mail archive of the
gdb-prs@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: gdb/2237: "set" command refuses to set a register
- From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at false dot org>
- To: nobody at sources dot redhat dot com
- Cc: gdb-prs at sources dot redhat dot com,
- Date: 8 Mar 2007 18:38:01 -0000
- Subject: Re: gdb/2237: "set" command refuses to set a register
- Reply-to: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at false dot org>
The following reply was made to PR gdb/2237; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>
To: Stephen Ma <stephenma@telus.net>
Cc: gdb-gnats@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: gdb/2237: "set" command refuses to set a register
Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2007 13:35:42 -0500
On Thu, Mar 08, 2007 at 10:31:43AM -0800, Stephen Ma wrote:
> I doubt it's fixable in the sense of intelligently handling an
> undecipherable stack. (Undecipherable, that is, to anything less than
> a weak AI.) In this general case, gdb is likely to end up doing the
> equivalent of dumb_gdb anyway.
I didn't mean "make it understand the stack". A stack with only one
recognizable frame, the current one, is perfectly valid. The known
GDB bug is that we don't handle the case of only one frame correctly.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery