From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13161 invoked by alias); 26 Dec 2008 12:54:11 -0000 Received: (qmail 13149 invoked by uid 22791); 26 Dec 2008 12:54:10 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,J_CHICKENPOX_22 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, 26 Dec 2008 12:53:33 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 95F75105BF; Fri, 26 Dec 2008 12:53:31 +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 476E910497; Fri, 26 Dec 2008 12:53:31 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1LGCC1-0003Ka-UO; Fri, 26 Dec 2008 07:53:29 -0500 Date: Fri, 26 Dec 2008 12:54:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Mathieu Lacage Cc: gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: how to make gdb happy with my linkmap Message-ID: <20081226125329.GA12783@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Mathieu Lacage , gdb@sourceware.org References: <74fef6df0812181341x8ecdd31me028bd4d658384b1@mail.gmail.com> <20081218214854.GA7706@caradoc.them.org> <74fef6df0812181402n1debced5xbe3f402a3a34ecf2@mail.gmail.com> <20081218221005.GA9012@caradoc.them.org> <74fef6df0812260239o1f21e833t6464c9d41bedcdd1@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <74fef6df0812260239o1f21e833t6464c9d41bedcdd1@mail.gmail.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/msg00089.txt.bz2 On Fri, Dec 26, 2008 at 11:39:59AM +0100, Mathieu Lacage wrote: > Ok, it appears that this is, indeed, sufficient to get good debugging > when running the executable from a PT_INTERP. However, as you > mentioned above, running the executable from the command-line without > an associated PT_INTERP entry seems to confuse gdb quite a bit: it > seems unable to place or handle breakpoints. Is there something I > could do to help alleviate this problem (I would be happy to do > whatever is needed in gdb proper) ? Maybe I could go and hack the > on-stack aux vectors to help gdb ? Does it work any better with ld.so? I doubt it - GDB doesn't do this well, and I don't have any clear idea on how to improve it. Sorry. There's probably a way that I haven't thought of. Modifying the on-stack auxv copy won't make a difference; GDB uses the read-only copy in the kernel (since locating the stack copy is unreliable, and it is prone to corruption). -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery