From owner-freebsd-hackers  Wed Jun 26 23:28:39 1996
Return-Path: owner-hackers
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id XAA04675
          for hackers-outgoing; Wed, 26 Jun 1996 23:28:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from time.cdrom.com (time.cdrom.com [204.216.27.226])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id XAA04668
          for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Wed, 26 Jun 1996 23:28:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from time.cdrom.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by time.cdrom.com (8.7.5/8.6.9) with ESMTP id XAA00514; Wed, 26 Jun 1996 23:27:59 -0700 (PDT)
To: Tony Kimball <alk@Think.COM>
cc: hackers@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: longstanding, woeful inadeqacy 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 26 Jun 1996 21:36:19 CDT."
             <199606270236.VAA02519@compound.Think.COM> 
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 23:27:59 -0700
Message-ID: <512.835856879@time.cdrom.com>
From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com>
Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> Similarly, fork.  
> 
> The reason why you would want to debug through the exec is
> to debug in the correct environment.  fork is perhaps a more
> compelling case?

Fork is an easier case since you don't need to swap the debugger's
executable out - just attach to the new process.

					Jordan