This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the GDB project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: [RFC] New command 'gcore'

From: Jason R Thorpe <thorpej at wasabisystems dot com>
To: Andrew Cagney <ac131313 at cygnus dot com>
Cc: msnyder at cygnus dot com, Eli Zaretskii <eliz at is dot elta dot co dot il>,gdb-patches at sources dot redhat dot com
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 18:04:44 -0800
Subject: Re: [RFC] New command 'gcore'
Organization: Wasabi Systems, Inc.
References: <3C17D3A0.DE140BFB@cygnus.com> <5567-Thu13Dec2001010400+0200-eliz@is.elta.co.il> <20011212152813.J28715@dr-evil.shagadelic.org> <3C18018E.9080902@cygnus.com> <20011212173359.L28715@dr-evil.shagadelic.org> <3C1808D3.1020504@cygnus.com>
Reply-to: thorpej at wasabisystems dot com

On Wed, Dec 12, 2001 at 05:48:03PM -0800, Andrew Cagney wrote:

 > But is that GDB's problem?  If the procfs / ptrace / ttrace interface is 
 > lieing (returning fp registers for the wrong LWP/thread) then we've 
 > worse problems than the above :-)

I suppose it all depends on what interface the backend uses to extract
the info from the target.

-- 
        -- Jason R. Thorpe <thorpej@wasabisystems.com>

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [RFC] New command 'gcore'
  - From: Andrew Cagney

References:
- [RFC] New command 'gcore'
  - From: Michael Snyder
- Re: [RFC] New command 'gcore'
  - From: Eli Zaretskii
- Re: [RFC] New command 'gcore'
  - From: Jason R Thorpe
- Re: [RFC] New command 'gcore'
  - From: Andrew Cagney
- Re: [RFC] New command 'gcore'
  - From: Jason R Thorpe
- Re: [RFC] New command 'gcore'
  - From: Andrew Cagney

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]