Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 27 Jun 1996 15:30:57 -0500 (CDT)
From:      Tony Kimball <alk@Think.COM>
To:        fhackers@jraynard.demon.co.uk
Cc:        jkh@time.cdrom.com, hackers@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: longstanding, woeful inadeqacy
Message-ID:  <199606272030.PAA26920@compound.Think.COM>
References:  <199606270638.BAA00387@compound.Think.COM> <199606270949.JAA00671@jraynard.demon.co.uk>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Quoth James Raynard on Thu, 27 June:
: > Easier in what sense?  It is essentially impossible to debug anything
: > that forks, since by the time you can attach to it, it has gone
: > veering wildly out of control.
: 
: Not if you put a sleep loop in it

And if I don't have source code?  Or a compiler?
Or if the insertion of the sleep loop fixes the compiler bug
which I was trying to find in the first place?
Or if the sleep loop prevents the process from meeting a
synchronization constraint which makes it impossible to
debug the original execution profile?





Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199606272030.PAA26920>