From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17178 invoked by alias); 31 Jan 2002 23:22:12 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 17073 invoked from network); 31 Jan 2002 23:22:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO TheWorld.com) (199.172.62.106) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 31 Jan 2002 23:22:09 -0000 Received: from shell.TheWorld.com (root@shell01.TheWorld.com [199.172.62.241]) by TheWorld.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA18486; Thu, 31 Jan 2002 18:22:08 -0500 Received: from localhost (qqi@localhost) by shell.TheWorld.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA10817353; Thu, 31 Jan 2002 18:22:07 -0500 (EST) X-Authentication-Warning: shell01.TheWorld.com: qqi owned process doing -bs Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 15:22:00 -0000 From: Quality Quorum To: Daniel Jacobowitz cc: Michael Snyder , "Sarnath K - CTD, Chennai." , Subject: Re: Thread Support for remote debugging In-Reply-To: <20020131181217.B4883@nevyn.them.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-SW-Source: 2002-01/txt/msg00382.txt.bz2 On Thu, 31 Jan 2002, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > On Thu, Jan 31, 2002 at 12:40:34PM -0800, Michael Snyder wrote: > > "Sarnath K - CTD, Chennai." wrote: > > > > > > Hi, > > > I have been browsing the mail archives for > > > knowing the current state of thread support > > > while doing remote debugging using GDB. > > > Although a lot of discussions have happened, > > > I am not able to find the current state of work > > > in that area. > > > > By "knowing the current state of thread support", > > do you mean finding out whether the remote target > > supports thread debugging? > > No, he means "knowing whether GDB and GDB Server support doing remote > debugging at all", as far as I can tell. > > We've covered this ground a couple times lately :) Someone promised to > contribute thread support and dropped off the face of the earth. It's > on my TODO list, but I don't anticipate getting to it any time soon. > Etc. If you are talking about me, I had it done more than one year ago: http://world.std.com/~qqi, see section about gdb. The problem is that (1) redhat never said 'yes we want it' so it is sitll based on 4.18, (2) there are a few issues which could be resolved one way or anotehr an readhat never said 'we want it this way'. > Daniel Jacobowitz Carnegie Mellon University Thanks, Aleksey