On Tue, Apr 30, 2002 at 02:09:49PM -0400, Roland McGrath wrote:
> My GDB changes did finally get into the mainline last week, but not into
> the 5.2 branch. So they will be in 5.3 or perhaps a 5.2.1 if there is one.
> You'll have to ask the GDB maintainers for more details about their branches.
> On Wed, Mar 13, 2002 at 05:15:43PM -0500, Roland McGrath wrote:
> > Thanks for your help. I've submitted the gdb patches, and the hurd crash
> > server code is all checked in.
>
> Have your changes made it into 5.2? I can't see a trace of them, but maybe
> I am ignorant. 5.2 is broken for us
On Wed, Mar 13, 2002 at 05:15:43PM -0500, Roland McGrath wrote:
> Thanks for your help. I've submitted the gdb patches, and the hurd crash
> server code is all checked in.
Have your changes made it into 5.2? I can't see a trace of them, but maybe
I am ignorant. 5.2 is broken for us anyway (gdb
Thanks for your help. I've submitted the gdb patches, and the hurd crash
server code is all checked in. As to core files, I think it's good and
done now. There's the remaining gdb hack to write the note segment for its
"gcore" command; I will whip that up before long, and it's not like anyone
h
Roland:
> I checked in the fix for that stupid libc bug (d'oh!).
No problem. Just glad I could help in some small way.
> As to gdb, did you test the gdb "gcore" command? Your patch didn't include
> any changes to the gnu_find_memory_regions function, but you also didn't
> say that it works. Si
s
multiple threads.
Please test the core file writing code. Once you've installed the new
crash server, and set /servers/crash using --core-file, you can test it
using the /bin/gcore command you already have. For actual crashes to
create core files properly, you need the libc fix (which is
Great stuff! Thanks again for working on this.
I checked in the fix for that stupid libc bug (d'oh!).
As to gdb, did you test the gdb "gcore" command? Your patch didn't include
any changes to the gnu_find_memory_regions function, but you also didn't
say that it works. Since that part of the c
Hurah!
At long last, I have succeeded in getting the following program
to produce and read a core file under the Hurd:
int main(int argc, char **argv){char *p = NULL; *p = '\0';}
This is not a done project, but I think enough is working to
upload some patches. There are some known issues/limita
Can you put this into gdb and test it if you get a chance? I'm CC'ing to
bug-hurd, in hopes that someone else might test this out and follow up
either with fixes or confirmation that it works. I'm not quite sure if
gdb's "gcore" will be happy doing just the memory part when there is no
make_core
> Yes. I saw this afternoon how to walk through memory with vm_region and
> I think I have this part of it in hand. Basic idea as I understand it
> is:
Well, inexactly, yes. There is also some old unfinshied code in hurd/exec/
that did some of this. I pointed you at vminfo because that is a wo
Roland McGrath wrote:
>
> The proc server is not really much involved. You need to understand the
> structure of the system and what Mach tasks and threads are about in some
> detail before attempting to work on this.
I can always attempt. Whether I succeed or not depends on my
understanding.
I
The proc server is not really much involved. You need to understand the
structure of the system and what Mach tasks and threads are about in some
detail before attempting to work on this.
Certainly writing an ELF core file is the right thing to do. How to store
the memory is clear, and that par
On Mon, Mar 04, 2002 at 04:38:42PM -0700, Jon Arney wrote:
> Roland:
>
> Since you said it's not really very hard to do, I thought I'd make
> an attempt at it with your permission.
You don't need any permission to hack, it's free software! :)
Jeroen Dekkers
--
Jabber supporter - http://www.jab
On Mon, Mar 04, 2002 at 04:38:42PM -0700, Jon Arney wrote:
> Roland:
>
> Since you said it's not really very hard to do, I thought I'd make
> an attempt at it with your permission.
I'm sure he will give it to you :)
> I am guided by other elf core writers (such as Linux's) and it seems
> to be
> Well, another thing that would certainly be useful to have is support for
> core files. The crash server works today, we just don't have a sensible
> core file format, and a function that dumps such a core file (and another
> function that allows gdb to read it back).
This is not really very h
15 matches
Mail list logo
