From owner-freebsd-hackers Thu Jul 8 16:57:22 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from smtp2.vnet.net (smtp2.vnet.net [166.82.1.32]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27001151D5 for ; Thu, 8 Jul 1999 16:57:18 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from rivers@dignus.com) Received: from dignus.com (ponds.vnet.net [166.82.177.48]) by smtp2.vnet.net (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id TAA10527; Thu, 8 Jul 1999 19:57:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lakes.dignus.com (lakes.dignus.com [10.0.0.3]) by dignus.com (8.9.2/8.8.5) with ESMTP id TAA16948; Thu, 8 Jul 1999 19:57:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from rivers@localhost) by lakes.dignus.com (8.9.2/8.6.9) id TAA74127; Thu, 8 Jul 1999 19:57:09 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 8 Jul 1999 19:57:09 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas David Rivers Message-Id: <199907082357.TAA74127@lakes.dignus.com> To: brdean@unx.sas.com, peter@netplex.com.au Subject: Re: support for i386 hardware debug watch points Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, rivers@dignus.com In-Reply-To: <199907041453.KAA03044@dean.pc.sas.com> Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG I just wondered if this should be integrated into ptrace(), so the various debuggers wouldn't have to know about it. It seems that would be the proper abstraction - hardware that supports it would "have it" - and the programs that "used it" wouldn't have to know anything special. I only have a passing knowledge of ptrace() - so, I may be totally wrong... - Dave Rivers - To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message