From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 1228 invoked by alias); 2 Jul 2002 10:50:46 -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 1185 invoked from network); 2 Jul 2002 10:50:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO main.gmane.org) (80.91.224.249) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 2 Jul 2002 10:50:35 -0000 Received: from root by main.gmane.org with local (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 17PLER-0007pm-00 for ; Tue, 02 Jul 2002 12:50:03 +0200 To: gdb@sources.redhat.com X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Received: from news by main.gmane.org with local (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 17PJqW-0005RH-00 for ; Tue, 02 Jul 2002 11:21:16 +0200 Path: not-for-mail From: "Dylan Cuthbert" Newsgroups: gmane.comp.gdb.user Subject: Re: dwarf2 unwinding for i386 Date: Tue, 02 Jul 2002 03:50:00 -0000 Message-ID: References: <3D172112.1050108@suse.cz> NNTP-Posting-Host: pppa201.kyoto-ip.dti.ne.jp Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-2" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1025601676 20902 210.159.246.201 (2 Jul 2002 09:21:16 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 09:21:16 +0000 (UTC) X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 X-SW-Source: 2002-07/txt/msg00022.txt.bz2 Could this be what's causing our problems on the cygwin platform? We are compiling with the latest version of g++ (3.1) and trying to debug with 5.2 of the debugger but get segment faults galore. Could it be that the cygwin stuff is compiled in 386 mode and causing our woes? This is really stumping us as we need a debugger, and currently gcc/gdb isn't really a good solution at the moment. Regards -- --------------------------------- Q-Games, Dylan Cuthbert. http://www.q-games.com "Michal Ludvig" wrote in message news:3D172112.1050108@suse.cz... > Hi all, > what do you think about adding dwarf2 unwinding (dwarf2cfi.c) to i386 > target? On x86-64 we are already using it for some time now and it seems > to be quite stable. GCC folks are about to switch omit-frame-pointer on > by default for i386 in a near future, but are waiting (as I understand > it) for GDB to implement dwarf2 unwinding, so that the resulting code > could be debugged. Can we make at least a testing branch with this > support? Opinions? MarkK? > > Michal Ludvig > -- > * SuSE CR, s.r.o * mludvig@suse.cz > * +420 2 9654 5373 * http://www.suse.cz > >