From owner-freebsd-questions  Fri May 19 07:28:44 1995
Return-Path: questions-owner
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
          by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) id HAA23611
          for questions-outgoing; Fri, 19 May 1995 07:28:44 -0700
Received: from mercury.ukc.ac.uk (mercury.ukc.ac.uk [129.12.21.10])
          by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) with SMTP id HAA23598
          for <questions@freebsd.org>; Fri, 19 May 1995 07:28:19 -0700
Message-Id: <199505191428.HAA23598@freefall.cdrom.com>
Received: from crane by mercury with UKC POP3+; Fri, 19 May 1995 15:27:35 +0100
To: questions@FreeBSD.org
Subject: How well is process debugging implemented in 2.x?
Date: Fri, 19 May 1995 15:27:32 +0100
From: David Clear <D.A.Clear@ukc.ac.uk>
Sender: questions-owner@FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

Hi,

Which out of ptrace and /proc is the process debugging interface
of choice?  I've looked over the source and by the comments it
seems that ptrace doesn't have attach/detach implemented very well
and the source for /proc says it's not possible to single step
through signal delivery!

The second question is, where is process debugging going in the
long term, ptrace or /proc?  Having looked at ptrace on SunOS 4.1.3
and /proc on Solaris, Solaris /proc does look very nice indeed.

Please reply directly to me as I'm not on the list.

Dave.