From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 31564 invoked by alias); 12 Dec 2008 01:04:57 -0000 Received: (qmail 31466 invoked by uid 22791); 12 Dec 2008 01:04:56 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from NaN.false.org (HELO nan.false.org) (208.75.86.248) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 12 Dec 2008 01:04:17 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 971D11019A; Fri, 12 Dec 2008 01:04:14 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (209.195.188.212.nauticom.net [209.195.188.212]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BC9710009; Fri, 12 Dec 2008 01:04:14 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1LAwRx-0003qT-Be; Thu, 11 Dec 2008 20:04:13 -0500 Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 01:04:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Michael Snyder Cc: Eric Cooper , "gdb@sourceware.org" Subject: Re: Reconstructing corrupt stacks/patching frame pointers Message-ID: <20081212010413.GA14763@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Michael Snyder , Eric Cooper , "gdb@sourceware.org" References: <2108A3A691C70B41B22A8C5ED3725423024DA3F9@sjcpexch02.citrite.net> <2108A3A691C70B41B22A8C5ED3725423024DA3FA@sjcpexch02.citrite.net> <49404DD0.60602@vmware.com> <20081211023236.GA17606@caradoc.them.org> <4941555D.6020205@vmware.com> <20081211181829.GA22220@caradoc.them.org> <4941AC7B.3070508@vmware.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4941AC7B.3070508@vmware.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2008-05-11) X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2008-12/txt/msg00040.txt.bz2 On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 04:12:43PM -0800, Michael Snyder wrote: > Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: >> On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 10:01:01AM -0800, Michael Snyder wrote: >>> Don't know whether it works for registers... >> >> It doesn't yet. > > Does that mean you're working on it? No, just that someone ought to. I don't think tieing it to 'set write' is the best idea; I'd like to be able to poke around, without having to make a copy of the core dump. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery