From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 32468 invoked by alias); 21 Apr 2002 05:14:08 -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 32459 invoked from network); 21 Apr 2002 05:14:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO is.elta.co.il) (199.203.121.2) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 21 Apr 2002 05:14:06 -0000 Received: from is (is [199.203.121.2]) by is.elta.co.il (8.9.3/8.8.8) with SMTP id JAA02886; Sun, 21 Apr 2002 09:12:33 +0300 (IDT) Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2002 22:14:00 -0000 From: Eli Zaretskii X-Sender: eliz@is To: Daniel Jacobowitz cc: Frank Schaefer , gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Problems debugging forked processes In-Reply-To: <20020419121038.A24030@nevyn.them.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-SW-Source: 2002-04/txt/msg00344.txt.bz2 On Fri, 19 Apr 2002, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > > (gdb) show follow-fork-mode > > Debugger response to a program call of fork or vfork is "parent". > > (gdb) set follow-fork-mode child > > (gdb) show follow-fork-mode > > Debugger response to a program call of fork or vfork is "child". > > This variable doesn't actually affect GNU/Linux. Yeah, I know, I know. > We need a documentation patch to address this; please file a PR > (http://sources.redhat.com/gdb/, Bugs). If someone tells me what should be documented, I'll do that. Now is the time, since v5.2 is in pretest. Is the issue that follow-fork-mode is only supported on a small number of systems? If so, what are those systems, and is it enough to have their list in the manual?