Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2002 23:55:03 -0500 (EST) From: Daniel Eischen <eischen@pcnet1.pcnet.com> To: Kip Macy <kmacy@netapp.com> Cc: dfr@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: to users of threads (GDB support) Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.10.10202112345220.7467-100000@pcnet1.pcnet.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.10.10202111919090.7921-100000@cranford>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 11 Feb 2002, Kip Macy wrote: > > > > There's no reason freebsd-uthread.c has to be included in gdb. > > I think that there are instances when an individual wants to use the latest and > greatest version of GDB and still have thread support. Even if the threads > library does change, the objfile function should be able to take that into > account. But the latest and greatest GDB (which should be a port) isn't likely to have a version of freebsd-uthread.c that works with the current libc_r or libpthread. We haven't even started the userland part of threadsNG so we have no idea what freebsd-uthread.c is going to look like. And when we do, expect a lot of changes to it. And just a day ago, I made a change to libc_r that requires (as yet uncommitted) mods to freebsd-uthread.c. IMHO, it doesn't make sense to include support for our threads into gdb just yet. If you import a recent gdb into current, then we already have a freebsd-uthread.c that can be modified as our threads library changes. If you make gdb a port, support for threads is going to be different depending on what version or release of FreeBSD you build for. -- Dan Eischen To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.GSO.4.10.10202112345220.7467-100000>