From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5226 invoked by alias); 16 Jan 2009 08:46:41 -0000 Received: (qmail 5218 invoked by uid 22791); 16 Jan 2009 08:46:40 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB,SPF_SOFTFAIL X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mtaout6.012.net.il (HELO mtaout6.012.net.il) (84.95.2.16) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 16 Jan 2009 08:46:00 +0000 Received: from conversion-daemon.i-mtaout6.012.net.il by i-mtaout6.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0KDK00E002Q5YU00@i-mtaout6.012.net.il> for gdb@sourceware.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2009 10:45:18 +0200 (IST) Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([77.127.202.36]) by i-mtaout6.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0KDK00K4Y2Z1TTC0@i-mtaout6.012.net.il>; Fri, 16 Jan 2009 10:45:17 +0200 (IST) Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 08:46:00 -0000 From: Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: Discussing the next GDB release (GDB 7.0?) In-reply-to: <8ac60eac0901152147o75f189bdm42053173bb29d5b9@mail.gmail.com> To: Paul Pluzhnikov Cc: brobecker@adacore.com, gdb@sourceware.org Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii Message-id: References: <20090115034552.GF24105@adacore.com> <20090116034623.GJ31296@adacore.com> <8ac60eac0901152147o75f189bdm42053173bb29d5b9@mail.gmail.com> 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: 2009-01/txt/msg00090.txt.bz2 > Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 21:47:34 -0800 > From: Paul Pluzhnikov > Cc: gdb@sourceware.org > > This had quite a large number of frames, *and* there were more > parameters in each frame, so it took longer. IIRC, it took > about 15 minutes to get to the top of the stack, where the > "interesting" frames were. Wouldn't "bt -20" help here? Or is that slow, too, for the same reason?