From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28357 invoked by alias); 30 Dec 2007 20:37:04 -0000 Received: (qmail 28348 invoked by uid 22791); 30 Dec 2007 20:37:03 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from nf-out-0910.google.com (HELO nf-out-0910.google.com) (64.233.182.186) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Sun, 30 Dec 2007 20:36:43 +0000 Received: by nf-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id b11so351115nfh.48 for ; Sun, 30 Dec 2007 12:36:40 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.78.138.14 with SMTP id l14mr14313293hud.57.1199046999736; Sun, 30 Dec 2007 12:36:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?78.130.88.130? ( [78.130.88.130]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 1sm17498163nfv.3.2007.12.30.12.36.38 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Sun, 30 Dec 2007 12:36:39 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <47780155.30304@portugalmail.pt> Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2007 20:41:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; pt-BR; rv:1.8.1.9) Gecko/20071031 Thunderbird/2.0.0.9 Mnenhy/0.7.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: PR/2386 [2/2]: MinGW attach to process without an exec file References: <47744F9C.8040604@portugalmail.pt> <20071228013457.GB7602@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> <477579E0.5010809@portugalmail.pt> <20071229035030.GC30002@adacore.com> <47764306.4060903@portugalmail.pt> <20071229180146.GC24999@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> <4776CDA3.90204@portugalmail.pt> <20071230025754.GA26252@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> In-Reply-To: <20071230025754.GA26252@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2007-12/txt/msg00479.txt.bz2 Christopher Faylor wrote: > In many cases they are the same and, when they aren't, there should > still be a /proc entry for the windows pid associated with the Cygwin > process, which is what I was saying above. > > For exec'ed stubs you won't see the windows pid entry if you 'ls /proc' > but it is there if you query it. Ah, OK. That's surprising. Nice. > Rather than go back and forth on this, I've taken a stab at implementing > what I'm trying to get across here. I don't think there is any reason to > now add Windows 9x support for features that have been missing for years > so I didn't do that. I don't know if they were missing from the non FSF MinGW port of gdb, but I won't go look either. Sure. What happened was that now if the exec file wasn't found, gdb would not see the dlls, since now the target_so_ops are associated with current_gdbarch. That's what the PR is about. Well, the 1/2 part of the patch also fixes that case, so it's OK. > I'll check this in unless there are serious objections. > No, not from me. Thanks, -- Pedro Alves