From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5695 invoked by alias); 17 Nov 2005 01:18:03 -0000 Received: (qmail 4799 invoked by uid 22791); 17 Nov 2005 01:17:25 -0000 Received: from dessent.net (HELO dessent.net) (69.60.119.225) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with ESMTP; Thu, 17 Nov 2005 01:17:25 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=dessent.net) by dessent.net with esmtp (Exim 4.54) id 1EcYOG-0002lT-Rv for gdb@sources.redhat.com; Thu, 17 Nov 2005 01:16:40 +0000 Message-ID: <437BD9F9.C2632918@dessent.net> Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 01:18:00 -0000 From: Brian Dessent MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Dumping core on windows? References: <437B87D4.4060304@candelatech.com> <437B8D6B.65249253@dessent.net> <437B8F4C.8060708@candelatech.com> <437BB169.D9EFCF92@dessent.net> <20051117000946.GA28025@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2005-11/txt/msg00329.txt.bz2 Christopher Faylor wrote: > Have you actually tried this, Brian? I was going to suggest something > like this but I wasn't sure if it worked with dumper. Yeah, I tried it before posting and it seemed to work - it created the core but I didn't try loading it into GDB. At first I thought it did not, though, because I was trying to specify a path to the filename argument of dumper, which does not work - it seems to create it using the given filename in the CWD of the faulting program, regardless of any path you give it. And I forgot to mention that you can run "drwtsn32 -i" to reinstall the default Dr. Watson fault handler after you're done with dumper. (BTW, there is a second %ld argument that the system will pass if present, I'm not sure what it represents though. Perhaps it's the exception number, but I tried testing with an access violation but the second parameter was 1928 - nothing close to 0xC0000005. I thought it also might have been the thread ID of the fault but that did not match up either... so it's a mystery to me.) Brian