From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Kevin Buettner To: Jiri Smid , gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: dummy breakpoint priority Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2001 08:42:00 -0000 Message-id: <1010831154155.ZM23298@ocotillo.lan> References: X-SW-Source: 2001-08/msg00226.html On Aug 31, 12:49pm, Jiri Smid wrote: > I have a problem with using generic dummy frames > (call_dummy_location - AT_ENTRY_POINT) together with solib-svr4.c. > At the entry point a breakpoint is created by solib-svr4.c and when > I call hand_function_call() another breakpoint is created at the same place. Why is solib-svr4.c setting a breakpoint at the entry point? (This sounds like a bug to me.) > The priority of breakpoints (table in breakpoint.c:bpstat_what()) > defines that the main action in this case is BPSTAT_WHAT_CHECK_SHLIBS. > This leads to the result that execution continues and sigsegvs. > Shouldn't the dummy breakpoint have higher priority? Perhaps. For your case, however, it seems to me though that you're going to have other problems if you invert the priorities. (I.e, what happens if you're really at a shlib breakpoint?) Kevin