From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Eli Zaretskii To: Andrew Cagney Cc: jtc@redback.com, GDB Discussion Subject: Re: xfer_memory(..., attrib, ...) post mortem Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2001 09:30:00 -0000 Message-id: References: <3AB8CF6A.FDBC1B2D@cygnus.com> X-SW-Source: 2001-03/msg00252.html On Wed, 21 Mar 2001, Andrew Cagney wrote: > However, I do see something very similar to a ``flag day'' looming. A > line needs to be draw in the sand after which point any target (read x86 > and arm) that isn't using gdbarch will be obsoleted. > > That line should probably be called ``5.2''. IMHO, this requires that a document be written explaining how to move a target to multi-arch, with practical suggestions and examples. I've read what's available about this (several times), and I cannot say I understand what needs to be done. >From ac131313@cygnus.com Fri Mar 23 09:30:00 2001 From: Andrew Cagney To: GDB Discussion Subject: TODO vs bug data base Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2001 09:30:00 -0000 Message-id: <3ABA1637.18A2EE1C@cygnus.com> X-SW-Source: 2001-03/msg00253.html Content-length: 505 Random thought for the day (and not original. I happened to be talking to a mozilla maintainer and they are already doing this). Does the bug tracking database superseed the bulk of the TODO file? I don't think the bug system can completly replace the TODO file - I'll still expect to see it used to publically record GDB's release status and file more generic TODO items. As a corollary, should ``Fix:'' generally be reserved for ``fixes'' - i.e. patches (Show me the money^D^D^D patch :-). Andrew >From aj@suse.de Fri Mar 23 09:30:00 2001 From: Andreas Jaeger To: Andrew Cagney Cc: Jiri Smid , gdb@sources.redhat.com, Jim Blandy Subject: Re: Port to x86-64 Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2001 09:30:00 -0000 Message-id: References: <3AB8D41C.790A7B60@cygnus.com> X-SW-Source: 2001-03/msg00254.html Content-length: 1869 Andrew Cagney writes: > Jiri Smid wrote: > > > > Hello, > > > > My name is Jiri Smid and I work for SuSE CR. > > SuSE works on porting Linux to new 64-bit AMD processors. > > I will work on port GDB. If we do introductions here, let's continue: I'm one of the glibc developers and port glibc to x86-64. I might work in some parts together with Jiri on gdb. > This is good, really good - you've raised the flag early! > > I can note/suggest the following: > > o get that assignment in order I'll send assign.future and the company disclaimer to Jiri, I hope that's all. My papers are already ok, they've been filed last year. > Remember, GDB can only accept the code > if the copyright of the work is all > in order. It is best to start working > on this one now so that you don't get > hit with it at the end. > > Part of this is ensuring that all > people contributing to your GDB have > a valid assignment in place. > > o submit the configury mess early > > even if you don't have real code > could I suggest thinking about > separating this out so that > you can get on with the real > work. > > This also avoids the age old > problem of things going into > a tail spin while people agree > on the correct name :-) > > o Your code will need to use > the multi-arch framework. > o You should watch out for > the GNU coding standard. > As they say, no pain, no gain :-) > > I also wonder if you actually need a separate CVS repository and > couldn't just live on a branch of the official GDB repository? It > should make merging a lot easier. Working on a branch might be the better idea. Shall Jiri send his ssh key to you for setting this up? Jiri, what do you prefer? Andreas -- Andreas Jaeger SuSE Labs aj@suse.de private aj@arthur.inka.de http://www.suse.de/~aj >From ac131313@cygnus.com Fri Mar 23 09:30:00 2001 From: Andrew Cagney To: Andreas Jaeger Cc: Jiri Smid , gdb@sources.redhat.com, Jim Blandy Subject: Re: Port to x86-64 Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2001 09:30:00 -0000 Message-id: <3ABA1CD0.E44BD96B@cygnus.com> References: <3AB8D41C.790A7B60@cygnus.com> X-SW-Source: 2001-03/msg00256.html Content-length: 620 > Working on a branch might be the better idea. Shall Jiri send his ssh > key to you for setting this up? Jiri, what do you prefer? Just FYI, there is a bit of a dance to follow here. To get access to the CVS repository you need to do the following: o have assignments et.al. in place o have access to SSH o demonstrate the ability to submit patches that follow both GDB's and the FSF conventions. I suggest starting with something small and mindless. Among other things, this provides a mechanism through which new contributors can publically and transparently establish their credentials. Andrew >From bronson@trestle.com Fri Mar 23 09:30:00 2001 From: bronson@trestle.com (Scott Bronson) To: gdb@sourceware.cygnus.com Subject: Trapping system calls Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2001 09:30:00 -0000 Message-id: <20010322105918.H16210@trestle.com> X-SW-Source: 2001-03/msg00255.html Content-length: 401 Is there any way to break into GDB when a particular system call is made? I want to trap every ioctl of a certain type. Short of scattering thousands of breakpoints throughout the code, I could find no way of doing this. In other words, I'm looking for the equivalent of "atb WaitNextEvent" (if there are any other ex-Mac hackers out there :). Am I missing the truly obvious? Thanks, - Scott