From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23015 invoked by alias); 17 Mar 2003 14:56:47 -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 22928 invoked from network); 17 Mar 2003 14:56:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO crack.them.org) (65.125.64.184) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 17 Mar 2003 14:56:47 -0000 Received: from nevyn.them.org ([66.93.61.169] ident=mail) by crack.them.org with asmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 18uxw0-0002wZ-00; Mon, 17 Mar 2003 10:58:01 -0600 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18uw2M-00080p-00; Mon, 17 Mar 2003 09:56:26 -0500 Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 14:56:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Frank.Christ@RSBICK.rohde-schwarz.com Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Antwort: Re: Re: Remote Debugging Of Multithreaded Application on PPC 82xx Message-ID: <20030317145624.GA30612@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Frank.Christ@RSBICK.rohde-schwarz.com, gdb@sources.redhat.com References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i X-SW-Source: 2003-03/txt/msg00254.txt.bz2 On Mon, Mar 17, 2003 at 03:43:19PM +0100, Frank.Christ@RSBICK.rohde-schwarz.com wrote: > Hi Daniel, > > I am using glibc 2.1.3! Here is my remote log! > The following two lines seem suspicious to me! > Packet Z0 (software-breakpoint) is NOT supported > binary downloading NOT suppported by target That's normal. > > Any hints regarding the remote log? I believe you've hit an unavoidable problem in the current remote protocol; when the client sends Hc0 followed by s, the stub has no way to know which thread to step. I've discussed this problem on the list before and we've never reached a consensus about how to solve it. Andrew, if you remember, this is the problem that my proposed "Hs" packet was supposed to solve. Hmm, rereading your last message on that thread it looks like I dropped the ball. You proposed something like "HtPID,0;s"; I guess I'm not entirely sure what you wanted that to mean. -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer