From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23784 invoked by alias); 12 Sep 2002 14:57:46 -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 23777 invoked from network); 12 Sep 2002 14:57:44 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO crack.them.org) (65.125.64.184) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 12 Sep 2002 14:57:44 -0000 Received: from nevyn.them.org ([66.93.61.169] ident=mail) by crack.them.org with asmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 17pWLl-0000Hm-00 for ; Thu, 12 Sep 2002 10:57:49 -0500 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 17pVPt-0000uk-00 for ; Thu, 12 Sep 2002 10:58:01 -0400 Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2002 07:57:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Broken remote protocol qOffsets response handling Message-ID: <20020912145801.GA3404@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: gdb@sources.redhat.com References: <3D80A114.1060809@agilent.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3D80A114.1060809@agilent.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i X-SW-Source: 2002-09/txt/msg00112.txt.bz2 On Thu, Sep 12, 2002 at 07:13:40AM -0700, Earl Chew wrote: > I started using qOffsets, and was dismayed to find that gdb remote.c > silently discards bss, and uses data twice instead. > > Looking through the archives, I see that jtc has already posted > a patch to resolve this issue (both in remote.c and nlm/gdbserve.c). > > http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/1999-q4/msg00011.html > > Apparently nlm/gdbserve.c is the root of the problem (.bss and .data > equivalent), and the hack in remote.c basically makes qOffsets useless > for most every other target that could use it. > > Is it simply too difficult to incorporate this patch? > > If we can't, I'd propose adding qSections (exactly the same syntax > as qOffsets) that doesn't have this inflexible behaviour. My vote is to include it (and possibly kill the NetWare stub at the same time). I don't believe this stub is in use any longer. But it's not my opinion that matters :) -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer