From: Michael Elizabeth Chastain <chastain@cygnus.com>
To: gdb@sourceware.cygnus.com
Subject: auto-solib-add for "attach" as well as "run"
Date: Thu, 04 May 2000 13:25:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200005042025.NAA22911@yorick.cygnus.com> (raw)
I have an enhancement request where a gdb user wants the
"auto-solib-add" flag to work with the "attach" command as well
as the "run" command.
Superficially, this looks like an entirely reasonable thing to do.
"run" and "attach" are different in how they handle processes,
but ought to work the same for the whole symbol-handling side of
the debugger.
Can anyone point out any gotchas or drawbacks if I just go ahead
and make "attach" honor the "auto-solib-add" flag?
Michael Chastain
chastain@redhat.com
Cygnus Solutions, a Red Hat Company
From cogen@ll.mit.edu Thu May 04 14:15:00 2000
From: David Cogen <cogen@ll.mit.edu>
To: dan@cgsoftware.com
Cc: kettenis@wins.uva.nl, gdb@sourceware.cygnus.com, cogen@poblano
Subject: Re: gdb seg violation during print command
Date: Thu, 04 May 2000 14:15:00 -0000
Message-id: <200005042111.RAA24006@ll.mit.edu>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10005041243050.28288-100000@propylaea.anduin.com>
X-SW-Source: 2000-05/msg00024.html
Content-length: 1062
> Try adding a line or three to main that do nothing.
Like this?
#include <iostream>
int tteesstt11 (int)
{
cerr << "\n";
return 4;
}
int main ()
{
cout << "1\n";
cout << "1\n";
cout << "1\n";
cout << "1\n";
cout << "1\n";
cout << "1\n";
cout << "1\n";
cout << "1\n";
cout << "1\n";
cout << "1\n";
cout << "1\n";
cout << "1\n";
cout << "1\n";
cout << "1\n";
cout << "1\n";
cout << "1\n";
cout << "1\n";
cout << "1\n";
cout << "1\n";
cout << "1\n";
cout << "1\n";
cout << "1\n";
cout << "1\n";
cout << "1\n";
cout << "1\n";
cout << "1\n";
cout << "1\n";
cout << "1\n";
cout << "1\n";
cout << "1\n";
cout << "1\n";
cout << "1\n";
cout << "1\n";
cout << "1\n";
cout << "1\n";
cout << "1\n";
cout << "1\n";
cout << "1\n";
cout << "1\n";
cout << "1\n";
cout << "1\n";
cout << "1\n";
cout << "1\n";
cout << "1\n";
cout << "1\n";
cout << "1\n";
}
I set my break on the first cout in main. When I print tteesstt11(1) I still
get the debugger seg violation.
-- DavidC
From dan@cgsoftware.com Thu May 04 14:20:00 2000
From: Daniel Berlin <dan@cgsoftware.com>
To: David Cogen <cogen@ll.mit.edu>
Cc: kettenis@wins.uva.nl, gdb@sourceware.cygnus.com, cogen@poblano
Subject: Re: gdb seg violation during print command
Date: Thu, 04 May 2000 14:20:00 -0000
Message-id: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10005041418390.29014-100000@propylaea.anduin.com>
References: <200005042111.RAA24006@ll.mit.edu>
X-SW-Source: 2000-05/msg00025.html
Content-length: 1778
And i don't
Breakpoint 1, main () at a.c:11
11 cout << "1\n";
Current language: auto; currently c++
(gdb) p tt
tt tteesstt11(int) ttyname
(gdb) p tteesstt11(1)
------ Arg is int [7], parm is int [7]
Overloaded function instance tteesstt11(int) # of parms 1
...Badness @ 0 : 0
...Badness @ 1 : 0
Overload resolution champion is 0, ambiguous? 0
$1 = 4
(gdb)
I can almost guarantee this is not a gdb bug.
Compiled with both dwarf2 debug info, and stabs debug info, it works fine
on BeOS and linux.
On Thu, 4 May 2000, David Cogen wrote:
> > Try adding a line or three to main that do nothing.
>
> Like this?
>
> #include <iostream>
>
> int tteesstt11 (int)
> {
> cerr << "\n";
> return 4;
> }
>
> int main ()
> {
> cout << "1\n";
> cout << "1\n";
> cout << "1\n";
> cout << "1\n";
> cout << "1\n";
> cout << "1\n";
> cout << "1\n";
> cout << "1\n";
> cout << "1\n";
> cout << "1\n";
> cout << "1\n";
> cout << "1\n";
> cout << "1\n";
> cout << "1\n";
> cout << "1\n";
> cout << "1\n";
> cout << "1\n";
> cout << "1\n";
> cout << "1\n";
> cout << "1\n";
> cout << "1\n";
> cout << "1\n";
> cout << "1\n";
> cout << "1\n";
> cout << "1\n";
> cout << "1\n";
> cout << "1\n";
> cout << "1\n";
> cout << "1\n";
> cout << "1\n";
> cout << "1\n";
> cout << "1\n";
> cout << "1\n";
> cout << "1\n";
> cout << "1\n";
> cout << "1\n";
> cout << "1\n";
> cout << "1\n";
> cout << "1\n";
> cout << "1\n";
> cout << "1\n";
> cout << "1\n";
> cout << "1\n";
> cout << "1\n";
> cout << "1\n";
> cout << "1\n";
> }
>
>
> I set my break on the first cout in main. When I print tteesstt11(1) I still
> get the debugger seg violation.
>
> -- DavidC
>
next reply other threads:[~2000-05-04 13:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2000-05-04 13:25 Michael Elizabeth Chastain [this message]
2000-05-04 22:50 ` Christopher Blizzard
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200005042025.NAA22911@yorick.cygnus.com \
--to=chastain@cygnus.com \
--cc=gdb@sourceware.cygnus.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox