From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7367 invoked by alias); 19 Sep 2005 20:38:44 -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 7268 invoked by uid 22791); 19 Sep 2005 20:38:35 -0000 Received: from host254.speakeasy.net (HELO douglas.highley-recommended.com) (216.231.62.254) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with ESMTP; Mon, 19 Sep 2005 20:38:35 +0000 Received: from douglas.highley-recommended.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by douglas.highley-recommended.com (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j8JKcWjx025587 for ; Mon, 19 Sep 2005 13:38:32 -0700 Received: (from dhighley@localhost) by douglas.highley-recommended.com (8.13.4/8.13.4/Submit) id j8JKcWwh025585 for gdb@sources.redhat.com; Mon, 19 Sep 2005 13:38:32 -0700 From: David Highley Message-Id: <200509192038.j8JKcWwh025585@douglas.highley-recommended.com> Subject: Re: RedHat Advanced Server 3 and thread debugging To: gdb@sources.redhat.com Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2005 20:38:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <200509191916.j8JJGrrM013515@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2005-09/txt/msg00132.txt.bz2 "Mark Kettenis wrote:" > > > Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2005 14:13:39 -0400 > > From: Paul Koning > > > > David> "Ajay Patel wrote:" > > >> David, > > >> > > >> GDB is broken for statically linked application. No body has > > >> bothered to fix this. > > > > David> Has the platform/tool world silently decided not to support > > David> static builds? > > > > I think Ajay is confused. Debugging statically linked applications > > works just fine; if anything, it's the more reliable case since it is > > the simpler case. > > > > Well, that all depends on what version of the Linux kernel you're > running, what version of glibc you're running, and of course what > version of gdb you're using. Kernel: 2.4.21-27.0.2.ELsmp Glibc: 2.3.2-95.27 gcc: 3.2.3-42 gdb: 6.1post-1.20040607.17 > It's also important to realize that if you're stripping (parts of) > your binaries, there's simply not enough information left for gdb to > produce meaningful backtraces. If you use -rdynamic, at least there > is the dynamic symbol table for gdb to use. We do not strip the executables. But oddly no one has addressed the original question of whether we get the same thread model between a static and dynamic link given we see with the ps command multiple pid's for a static link and one pid for dynamic link. Then there was a reply that indicated there were patches, but no furthur information. Do we need to patch the; OS, gcc, ld, gdb, etc. > Mark >