gdb doesn't work very well with dynamic linked binaries

H . J . Lu
Tue Sep 5 20:45:00 GMT 2000

On Tue, Sep 05, 2000 at 06:01:39PM -0700, Stan Shebs wrote:
> > 
> > I can do this Very Soon (tm) provided that I hear a GO from The Powers
> > That Be.  Andrew?  Stan?  What say you?
> Uh, is there any reason not to?  We tell people that GDB can support
> h/w watchpoints, seems like we ought to deliver it on our most popular
> platforms.  Perhaps I could be evil and insist on adding a testsuite test
> that would take 24 hours to run if h/w watchpoints don't work... think
> that would help motivate anyone? :-)

How about this patch? As I said, I will work on Linux since I use this
feature a lot.


2000-09-05  H.J. Lu  <>

	* TODO: Add hardware watchpint problems on x86 OSes for 5.1.

--- TODO	Thu Aug 10 15:23:13 2000
+++ /tmp/TODO	Tue Sep  5 20:41:08 2000
@@ -12,6 +12,26 @@ cycle.  People hope to have these proble
+Hardware watchpint problems on x86 OSes, including Linux:
+1. Delete/disable hardware watchpoints should free hardware debug
+2. Watch for different values on a viariable with one hardware debug
+According to Eli Zaretskii <>:
+These are not GDB/ia32 issues per se: the above features are all
+implemented in the DJGPP port of GDB and work in v5.0.  Every
+x86-based target should be able to lift the relevant parts of
+go32-nat.c and use them almost verbatim.  You get debug register
+sharing through reference counts, and the ability to watch large
+regions (up to 16 bytes) using multiple registers.  (The required
+infrastructure in high-level GDB application code, mostly in
+breakpoint.c, is also working since v5.0.)
 RFD: infrun.c: No bpstat_stop_status call after proceed over break?

More information about the Gdb mailing list