Strange stack trace on Windows

[Roland Schwingel]

Hi Joel...
 
Thanks for your reply...

gdb-owner@sourceware.org wrote on 19.03.2009 15:18:06:

 > [...]
 > The idea is that, during a function call made during single-stepping,
 > you'll stop at the first instruction of the function.  At this point,
 > we want to use the standard method of computing the frame cache rather
 > than using the alternative method of trusting the %ebp register.
 > This is what the check that I added was about.
 >
 > The patch that I sent was to be made on top of the first patch
 > that I sent long ago. Did you do that?
Sure. I made my changes on top of your older patch. I studied your old/new
patch over and over. I had to slightly adjust it as your new patch does not
100% match the current cvs code. If you like I send you my full i386-tdep.c
(it is quite fat - so I do not attach it now)

 >
 > > In my tests both cache->pc and current_pc are ALWAYS identical.
 >
 > They should be identical when you step into a function during
 > your "next" operation, but other should be different. If this is not
 > the case, then I missed something (maybe something obvious).

Would it help if I make a simple plain c example (source + executable code)
which you can step thru on your own? If you have the time to do so...

Roland