From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18178 invoked by alias); 5 Jan 2007 19:26:10 -0000 Received: (qmail 18167 invoked by uid 22791); 5 Jan 2007 19:26:09 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from tmpnat1.honeywell.com (HELO AZ18CN851.global.ds.honeywell.com) (199.64.0.252) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Fri, 05 Jan 2007 19:26:03 +0000 Received: from AZ18EV808.global.ds.honeywell.com ([131.127.167.102]) by AZ18CN851.global.ds.honeywell.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Fri, 5 Jan 2007 12:26:01 -0700 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: GDB solib interface Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2007 19:26:00 -0000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20070105040110.GA9962@nevyn.them.org> From: "Smith, Stephen \(SWCOE\)" To: "Daniel Jacobowitz" Cc: 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: 2007-01/txt/msg00100.txt.bz2 Ok, I have our gdbserver using the updated solib-remote gdb patch using the dll stop packet. You said that you've tested the load/unload packet so as far as I know the patch has been successfully updated to compile and link with 6.5 (which was the last release when I started work on it). I will make sure that the patch compiles/links against head. Should I propose the code patch before the documentation patch is created - so that the code can be critiqued? I remember that I need to make sure that the files that are to be changed are formatted properly (Kevin Buettner said to use "indent -fca=20 -lc80 -l80"). When I do that the patch grows by about a factor of 10 due to unrelated items being reformatted to match the GNU coding standard. Do you want me to run indent before or after the patch is reviewed? Also how do we get the published changes to the gdb/gdbserver protocol approved? The interface documentation does not need changing unless someone here doesn't like it. Then again I've never updated the gdb documentation and so don't know how to go about it. Could someone point me in the right direction? BTW - I have a copyright assignment on file with FSF and nothing has changed on this end to negate it. -----Original Message----- From: Daniel Jacobowitz [mailto:drow@false.org]=20 Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 9:01 PM To: Smith, Stephen (SWCOE) Cc: Stephen & Linda Smith; gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: GDB solib interface On Thu, Jan 04, 2007 at 08:54:54PM -0700, Smith, Stephen (SWCOE) wrote: > Ok, I have the string 'T05dll:dll'. Single stepping trough the code, I > get p1 -> ll:dll and p -> dll:dll. Therefore I never enter the block. >=20 > What did I do wrong with the packet? I said I was certain load and unload worked - I hadn't tested dll. Looks like the leading 'd' means it needs to be handled just like awatch above. --=20 Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery