From owner-freebsd-hackers Mon Feb 11 19:19:12 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from ftpbox.mot.com (ftpbox.mot.com [129.188.136.101]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0117C37C34E for ; Mon, 11 Feb 2002 19:16:26 -0800 (PST) Received: [from pobox3.mot.com (pobox3.mot.com [10.64.251.242]) by ftpbox.mot.com (ftpbox 2.1) with ESMTP id UAA26566 for ; Mon, 11 Feb 2002 20:16:25 -0700 (MST)] Received: [from latour.rsch.comm.mot.com (latour.rsch.comm.mot.com [145.1.80.116]) by pobox3.mot.com (MOT-pobox3 2.0) with ESMTP id UAA15701 for ; Mon, 11 Feb 2002 20:05:04 -0700 (MST)] Received: (from rittle@localhost) by latour.rsch.comm.mot.com (8.11.6/8.11.4) id g1C3GOO83626; Mon, 11 Feb 2002 21:16:24 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from rittle) Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2002 21:16:24 -0600 (CST) From: Loren James Rittle Message-Id: <200202120316.g1C3GOO83626@latour.rsch.comm.mot.com> To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: to users of threads (GDB support) In-Reply-To: References: Organization: Networks and Infrastructure Lab (IL02/2240), Motorola Labs Cc: rittle@latour.rsch.comm.mot.com Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG >> Loren Rittle indicated that they were [in a form useful to /usr/ports] Actually, to avoid all confusion, I privately wrote Kip to say that I was able to extract out his updated thread support and apply it to my local mainline binutils tree. That is a bit different than indicating the work is in proper FreeBSD /usr/port patch form or canonical FSF patch form. ;-) >> but pointed out what you have already pointed out to me:[...] > There's no reason freebsd-uthread.c has to be included in gdb. > We've been maintaining it in our own tree for some time now. > There's advantages to maintaining it in our own tree anyways. > Our threads library is still under development, not to mention > threadsNG where a lot is probably going to change. I completely agree with the advantage listed. However, overall, I must disagree with you as one working on improving gcc3 both in general and for FreeBSD. I wouldn't disagree with you if the base gdb in FreeBSD could debug the latest C++ and Dwarf output from gcc 3. Either way, I concede that my gdb requirements are a special case... Regards, Loren -- Loren J. Rittle Senior Staff Software Engineer, Distributed Object Technology Lab Networks and Infrastructure Research Lab (IL02/2240), Motorola Labs rittle@rsch.comm.mot.com, KeyID: 2048/ADCE34A5, FDC0292446937F2A240BC07D42763672 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message