From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 31501 invoked by alias); 23 Nov 2004 20:45:15 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 31467 invoked from network); 23 Nov 2004 20:45:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO legolas.inter.net.il) (192.114.186.24) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 23 Nov 2004 20:45:11 -0000 Received: from zaretski ([80.230.156.45]) by legolas.inter.net.il (MOS 3.5.5-GR) with ESMTP id DEJ49858 (AUTH halo1); Tue, 23 Nov 2004 22:44:35 +0200 (IST) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 21:21:00 -0000 From: "Eli Zaretskii" To: Andrew Cagney Message-ID: <01c4d19d$Blat.v2.2.2$0109b2e0@zahav.net.il> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 CC: gdb@sources.redhat.com In-reply-to: <41A363FE.9060307@redhat.com> (message from Andrew Cagney on Tue, 23 Nov 2004 11:23:26 -0500) Subject: Re: new option --readnever & script gstack? Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii References: <41A24D4E.6090301@redhat.com> <01c4d151$Blat.v2.2.2$ca52d9c0@zahav.net.il> <41A363FE.9060307@redhat.com> X-SW-Source: 2004-11/txt/msg00228.txt.bz2 > Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 11:23:26 -0500 > From: Andrew Cagney > Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com > > Lets focus on "pstack", or a potential GDB alternative, "gstack". Thanks for the explanations. It sounds like the -readnever option you propose would be useful only in the pstack-like situation. So how about adding a -pstack option which will do whatever it takes for GDB to emulate pstack, i.e. avoid reading the symbols, produce a backtrace, and then detach from the process?