Re: expected behavior of GNU/Linux gcore and corefiles

[Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com>]

On Sun, Mar 02, 2003 at 03:05:12PM -0500, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> 
> >>
> >>If that position means precluding certain native-only functionality?
> >
> >
> >Not exactly; if that native-only functionality precludes keeping what
> >we have now for non-thread_db setups and extending it.
> 
> 
> 
> >For instance, I
> >think we should always be able to print LWP state (assuming a 1-1
> >mapping when we have no thread_db to ask for more information).  And I
> >think we should add support for TLS based only on LWPs, since it's not
> >dependent on the thread manager.  If we can't "info mutex" on a cross
> >corefile, well, that's the same as now.
> 
> To draw this back to the original post.  What of a native GDB loading 
> libthread-db over a core file to determine thread IDs and TLS?

Well, it makes me pretty nervous - we (have to) load libthread_db from
/lib.  Not from solib-absolute-prefix.  I have several setups where I
debug core files from one machine on another.

That said, I don't see any reason we shouldn't support it.  We need to
get it to work, of course.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer