This is the mail archive of the gdb@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: GDB support for thread-local storage


This is the more substantial objection, it seems to me.  But simply
because libthread_db can't be used for cross-platform core files
doesn't mean we shouldn't use it in the native case --- for the same
reasons we use it on live processes.

Maybe.... I don't think the analogy holds.  When we use it on live
processes there is always a system (somewhere) on which thread_db could
be running.  That's why I was willing to use it in gdbserver.  Of
course, it's ONE MORE library that needs to be on all my targets now,
which I'm not in love with.

Debugging a core dump can't validly require access to a target.  So
making "native debug of a core dump" different from the hopeful "cross
debug of a core dump" seems a bit dodgy.
Yes.

 I'd call the libthread_db
approach broken for this purpose (a little outside its design scope
perhaps).
I think it reflects limitations of the current libthread-db interface rather than a broken approach.

Andrew




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