From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-66180-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 27405 invoked by alias); 24 Aug 2009 03:15:17 -0000
Received: (qmail 27394 invoked by uid 22791); 24 Aug 2009 03:15:16 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.7 required=5.0 	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET,SPF_SOFTFAIL
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from mtaout22.012.net.il (HELO mtaout22.012.net.il) (80.179.55.172)     by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 24 Aug 2009 03:15:02 +0000
Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout22.012.net.il by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0KOV002002C3OG00@a-mtaout22.012.net.il> for gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Mon, 24 Aug 2009 06:15:00 +0300 (IDT)
Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([84.228.180.85]) by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0KOV0019Y2CZYQ50@a-mtaout22.012.net.il>; Mon, 24 Aug 2009 06:14:59 +0300 (IDT)
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 07:46:00 -0000
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Subject: Re: Bug in i386_process_record?
In-reply-to: <20090823235320.GA14997@caradoc.them.org>
To: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>
Cc: teawater@gmail.com, msnyder@vmware.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Message-id: <83ws4tewcs.fsf@gnu.org>
References: <daef60380908102319k56787d57w49ea1cf4ed338584@mail.gmail.com> <4A8A2ACD.9000208@vmware.com> <daef60380908180221u15eabc48x650e7c592be11976@mail.gmail.com> <daef60380908202003o56acdb46r731b331be6fee544@mail.gmail.com> <4A90B261.2030602@vmware.com> <daef60380908222030k3251e57eha4a8c38c616b6819@mail.gmail.com> <4A90C08A.8000107@vmware.com> <daef60380908222129g483ed968sce36e561a0febf2f@mail.gmail.com> <837hwufkxr.fsf@gnu.org> <daef60380908231642h1d85f7b5r70a5856647335f4c@mail.gmail.com> <20090823235320.GA14997@caradoc.them.org>
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb-patches.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2009-08/txt/msg00379.txt.bz2

> Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2009 19:53:20 -0400
> From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>
> Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>, msnyder@vmware.com,
> 	gdb-patches@sourceware.org
> 
> If I remember correctly, the %es that GDB sees is the selector rather
> than the base address.

Yes, at least in the DJGPP Port, that's so.

> I think any halfway recent Linux kernel exposes both values, but GDB
> doesn't display the bases - this probably bears fixing!

There's a system call in DJGPP to get the base address; see "info
dos".