From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16050 invoked by alias); 11 Oct 2004 17:46:55 -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 16042 invoked from network); 11 Oct 2004 17:46:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 11 Oct 2004 17:46:54 -0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.12.11/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9BHksDi009248 for ; Mon, 11 Oct 2004 13:46:54 -0400 Received: from pobox.corp.redhat.com (pobox.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.156]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i9BHksr18535; Mon, 11 Oct 2004 13:46:54 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain (vpn50-43.rdu.redhat.com [172.16.50.43]) by pobox.corp.redhat.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id i9BHkrQ7027224; Mon, 11 Oct 2004 13:46:53 -0400 Received: from saguaro (saguaro.lan [192.168.64.2]) by localhost.localdomain (8.12.11/8.12.10) with SMTP id i9BHkme6025025; Mon, 11 Oct 2004 10:46:48 -0700 Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 19:03:00 -0000 From: Kevin Buettner To: Randolph Chung Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Question about _dl_debug_state and new glibc Message-Id: <20041011104647.6a03d9ce@saguaro> In-Reply-To: <20041011172207.GA14151@tausq.org> References: <20041011172207.GA14151@tausq.org> Organization: Red Hat Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2004-10/txt/msg00284.txt.bz2 On Mon, 11 Oct 2004 10:22:07 -0700 Randolph Chung wrote: > I've been away from gdb for a bit, so hopefully this is not something > simple I missed while I've been away :) > > It appears that newer versions of glibc now marks the _dl_debug_state > function as hidden, making it not visible to gdb. This breaks the > solib tracking code in solib-svr4.c..... > > Looking at the docs, it looks like the "proper" way for gdb to do this > is to look up the r_debug symbol and use the r_brk member to locate > _dl_debug_state's address. is there any particular reason why we don't > do this in gdb? I can't think of any reason. I'm guessing that it was more expedient for the original authors of the code to do it the way it was done. In any case, I know of no reason not to change it so that it's done "properly". Patches are welcome... Kevin