This is the mail archive of the
gdb@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: SIG32/SIGTRAP issues
On Tue, Dec 03, 2002 at 06:58:33PM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 03, 2002 at 06:52:30PM -0500, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> > >
> > >Funny, no one reports this for months and this is the third report I've
> > >seen in a week... At the bottom of this message is a workaround. I'm
> > >not proposing it be committed, since it's obviously pretty gross. The
> > >real issue is the concept of thread_stratum and core_stratum as
> > >separate from process_stratum. I don't think it's appropriate - if we
> > >are debugging a core and process at the same time this isn't how it
> > >should work. This ties in to all the make-targets-a-real-stack thing -
> > >I'm not entirely convinced on that score either.
> >
> > GDB Speak :-) `An inferior stack', separate to the stratum. Having
> > implemented the idea, I'm pretty much convinced it's the correct
> > approach (although, as you demonstrate, not absolutly necessary).
>
> Hrm, interesting. A stack doesn't seem logical for that, just support
> for multiple targets... pull one out when you want it. That could be
> adapted to solve this problem. Let's see the code :)
>
>
> ===
>
>
> HJ, I'm pretty sure your patch won't work right in this case:
>
> # gdb static-app corefile
> (gdb) run
>
> There will be no new call to the objfile hook, and no new pushes, and
> thread-db won't load.
>
No, it is not perfect.
H.J.