From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6691 invoked by alias); 19 Feb 2007 14:40:54 -0000 Received: (qmail 6678 invoked by uid 22791); 19 Feb 2007 14:40:53 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mailgw1.technion.ac.il (HELO mailgw1.technion.ac.il) (132.68.238.34) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Mon, 19 Feb 2007 14:40:45 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mailgw1.technion.ac.il (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B211AC55F; Mon, 19 Feb 2007 16:40:42 +0200 (IST) Received: from mailgw1.technion.ac.il ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mailgw1.technion.ac.il [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id kM2k7OHAEU-j; Mon, 19 Feb 2007 16:40:42 +0200 (IST) Received: from techunix.technion.ac.il (techunix.technion.ac.il [132.68.1.28]) by mailgw1.technion.ac.il (Postfix) with ESMTP id D363BAC536; Mon, 19 Feb 2007 16:40:41 +0200 (IST) Received: from tp-veksler.haifa.ibm.com (techunix.technion.ac.il [132.68.1.28]) by techunix.technion.ac.il (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6EDC1497B; Mon, 19 Feb 2007 16:40:41 +0200 (IST) (envelope-from mveksler@tx.technion.ac.il) Message-ID: <45D9B6EA.6050309@tx.technion.ac.il> Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2007 14:54:00 -0000 From: Michael Veksler User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0b2 (X11/20070116) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Thomas Neumann , gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: Organization of breakpoint locations References: <45D97E30.2060008@users.sourceforge.net> <20070219115744.GC6815@caradoc.them.org> <45D99E03.1050309@users.sourceforge.net> <20070219130342.GA10857@caradoc.them.org> In-Reply-To: <20070219130342.GA10857@caradoc.them.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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: 2007-02/txt/msg00201.txt.bz2 Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > One nice thing is that if you kill or crash GDB today, it tends > to leave breakpoints removed. If it didn't do this huge massive > removal, it probably wouldn't - perhaps we should add a signal handler > that takes care of that if we change it. > I always thought (speculated) that breakpoint removal was to simplify things like (gdb) x /i $pc Where you don't want to see the INT instruction, but the original value. GDB crash does sound like another reason. Being curios, I'd like to ask what was the original reason for this behavior? Does anyone know? I never saw it documented anywhere. -- Michael Veksler http:///tx.technion.ac.il/~mveksler