Re: gdbserver for m68k-uclinux

Jean-Rene Peulve
2006-05-09T11:58:56Z

Hi Natan,

Sorry you were right. No need for my extra return. I did not spot the
return just below !

About my extra fprintf on the target console:
I am also debugging kernel modules and I am used to specify the
add-symbol-file for several of them
in adition to the kernel.

For gdbserver, I was using one gdb command file to debug several
applications then when I start
gdb I didn't specify the file to debug in the command line and then I used
add-symbol-file afterward.

With your remark in mind, I try to specify the application to debug in the
command line and you are also right: the extra fprintf is not mandatory but
I need to spend more time on it to see if there is any need left.

Jean-René

At 12:07 09/05/06, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
>Jean-Rene Peulve wrote:
>>Hi Nathan,
>>Oups: I resend this because the previous email was html and got bounced
>>by gdb@sources.redhat.com
>
>Thanks for testing the patch out!
>
>>I have been forced to change your patch to make it works.
>>1) missing return in server.c
>The return you've added is unnecessary.
>
>>2) I also add an fprintf to stderr with the address of the text and data
>>section to allow the use of add-symbol_file command which requires these
>>address.
>> The response to qOffsets being hidden by gdb, I then can get it from
>> the target console or telnet.
>
>Dan, I'll leave this change for you to decide. I don't understand the
>usage here. Why is it not necessary to know the text_end address in this
>case, for instance?
>
>>+ if (the_target->read_offsets (&text, &data)) {
>>+ sprintf (own_buf, "Text=%lX;Data=%lX;Bss=%lX",
>>+ (long)text, (long)data, (long)data);
>>+ return;
>This return is not needed, why did you find it necessary?
>
>>+ }
>>+ else
>>+ write_enn (own_buf);
>>+
>>+ return;
>>+ }
>
>nathan
>
>--
>Nathan Sidwell :: http://www.codesourcery.com :: CodeSourcery
>nathan@codesourcery.com :: http://www.planetfall.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk