From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6371 invoked by alias); 7 Mar 2002 07:02:23 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 6308 invoked from network); 7 Mar 2002 07:02:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO rwcrmhc52.attbi.com) (216.148.227.88) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 7 Mar 2002 07:02:11 -0000 Received: from ocean.lucon.org ([12.234.143.38]) by rwcrmhc52.attbi.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.27 201-229-121-127-20010626) with ESMTP id <20020307070211.KGWT1147.rwcrmhc52.attbi.com@ocean.lucon.org> for ; Thu, 7 Mar 2002 07:02:11 +0000 Received: by ocean.lucon.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 795C9125C3; Wed, 6 Mar 2002 23:02:10 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 06 Mar 2002 23:02:00 -0000 From: "H . J . Lu" To: GDB Subject: Re: break doesn't work with thread on mips Message-ID: <20020306230210.A31473@lucon.org> References: <20020306010500.A12030@lucon.org> <20020306223507.A13326@nevyn.them.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <20020306223507.A13326@nevyn.them.org>; from drow@mvista.com on Wed, Mar 06, 2002 at 10:35:07PM -0500 X-SW-Source: 2002-03/txt/msg00039.txt.bz2 On Wed, Mar 06, 2002 at 10:35:07PM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > On Wed, Mar 06, 2002 at 01:05:00AM -0800, H . J . Lu wrote: > > When I do > > > > # gdb a.out > > (gdb) b main > > Breakpoint 1 at 0x400910: file x.c, line 25. > > (gdb) r > > (gdb) del 1 > > (gdb) b main > > reading register sp (#29): No such process. > > > > That is break no longer works after the program runs if thread is used. > > Why does gdb want to read sp anyway? It sounds like the old bug: > > > > http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb/2001-11/msg00156.html > > > > Has it been fixed? > > Are you using current GDB? > > Program exited normally. > (gdb) del 1 > (gdb) b main > Breakpoint 2 at 0x4009f4: file twothreads.c, line 16. > It seems fixed in 5.2. H.J.