[bug] problem printing local vars in shared lib function

[bug] problem printing local vars in shared lib function

[Michael Snyder]

Does this sound familiar to anybody?  X86_64...

I have a local shared library function, built with -g,
gdb has its symbols and can list it, step into it, step
within it etc.

I can print the values of the function parameters, but
not the values of local (automatic) variables.  These
are not statics but autos on the stack.

GDB complains that the memory is inaccessible when
I use "print", but if I use "examine" ('x'), it works
fine and displays the value.

Doesn't seem to matter what the type of the variable is.

Stack variables in the main executable program (ie. not
in the shared library) work fine.

I've even tried this with -gstabs as opposed to dwarf.
Same symptom.

Executable: GNU gdb 6.8-debian
OS: Ubuntu Hardy (8.0.4) x86_64, kernel 2.6.24-19-generic

Re: [bug] problem printing local vars in shared lib function

[André Pönitz]

On Tuesday 28 October 2008 00:03:42 Michael Snyder wrote:
> Does this sound familiar to anybody?  X86_64...
> 
> I have a local shared library function, built with -g,
> gdb has its symbols and can list it, step into it, step
> within it etc.
> 
> I can print the values of the function parameters, but
> not the values of local (automatic) variables.  These
> are not statics but autos on the stack.

Is this function a constructor?

If so, it sounds familiar ;-}

Andre'

Re: [bug] problem printing local vars in shared lib function

[Michael Snyder]

André Pönitz wrote:
> On Tuesday 28 October 2008 00:03:42 Michael Snyder wrote:
>> Does this sound familiar to anybody?  X86_64...
>>
>> I have a local shared library function, built with -g,
>> gdb has its symbols and can list it, step into it, step
>> within it etc.
>>
>> I can print the values of the function parameters, but
>> not the values of local (automatic) variables.  These
>> are not statics but autos on the stack.
> 
> Is this function a constructor?
> 
> If so, it sounds familiar ;-}

No, I don't think so, I believe it was an ordinary
function, and in fact I think the problem was demonstrated
to me in several different shlib functions.