From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19369 invoked by alias); 22 Feb 2006 21:57:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 18983 invoked from network); 22 Feb 2006 21:57:44 -0000 Received: from unknown (195.23.133.218) by sourceware.org with QMTP; 22 Feb 2006 21:57:44 -0000 Received: (qmail 27330 invoked from network); 22 Feb 2006 21:57:42 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailfrt07.isp.novis.pt) ([195.23.133.199]) (envelope-sender ) by mailrly08.isp.novis.pt with compressed SMTP; 22 Feb 2006 21:57:42 -0000 Received: (qmail 24223 invoked from network); 22 Feb 2006 21:57:41 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO [127.0.0.1]) ([195.23.225.140]) (envelope-sender ) by mailfrt07.isp.novis.pt with SMTP; 22 Feb 2006 21:57:41 -0000 Message-ID: <43FCDE5E.3070008@portugalmail.pt> Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 04:29:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Windows/20041206) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: gdb on arm-wince-pe References: <43FB7B0C.2010703@portugalmail.pt> <20060222044009.GB10442@nevyn.them.org> <20060222052405.GD17740@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> In-Reply-To: <20060222052405.GD17740@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0608-0, 20-02-2006), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-02/txt/msg00312.txt.bz2 Christopher Faylor wrote: >On Tue, Feb 21, 2006 at 11:40:09PM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > > >>On Tue, Feb 21, 2006 at 08:41:48PM +0000, Pedro Alves wrote: >> >> >>>Where should I start looking for/what is needed to implement it (ctrl_c >>>breaking)? >>>I tried debugging arm-wince-pe-gdb on gdb itself, putting some >>>breakpoints in the signal handling, >>>and issuing kill -INT signals to see what happens there, and I see that >>>ultimatly, quit (void) is called. >>>Is there some target_op that I should implement, or should I provide my >>>own signal handling? >>> >>> >>Take a look at remote.c, which installs its own signal handler. You'll >>want to do something similar. >> >>Really, if possible, I would recommend using remote.c to talk to your >>target over the standard GDB remote protocol instead of the >>WinCE-specific protocol that wince-stub.c implements. That's much >>better supported. >> >> > >As the author of the WinCE-specific protocol, I agree 100%. Really, I >think that the WinCE targets should be deprecated since they no longer >have a maintainer. > >cgf > > > Ok, thanks for the quick replies. I'll see what I can do. Cheers, Pedro Alves