From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18585 invoked by alias); 3 Apr 2003 02:30:54 -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 18575 invoked from network); 3 Apr 2003 02:30:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO TYO202.gate.nec.co.jp) (202.32.8.202) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 3 Apr 2003 02:30:50 -0000 Received: from mailgate3.nec.co.jp ([10.7.69.194]) by TYO202.gate.nec.co.jp (8.11.6/3.7W01080315) with ESMTP id h332UmU09738; Thu, 3 Apr 2003 11:30:48 +0900 (JST) Received: (from root@localhost) by mailgate3.nec.co.jp (8.11.6/3.7W-MAILGATE-NEC) id h332UlA25691; Thu, 3 Apr 2003 11:30:47 +0900 (JST) Received: from edtmg03.lsi.nec.co.jp ([10.26.16.203]) by mailsv4.nec.co.jp (8.11.6/3.7W-MAILSV4-NEC) with ESMTP id h332UY524694; Thu, 3 Apr 2003 11:30:46 +0900 (JST) Received: from mcsss2.ucom.lsi.nec.co.jp (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by edtmg03.lsi.nec.co.jp (8.9.3+3.2W/3.7W_EDC_Ver.1.0) with ESMTP id LAA20495; Thu, 3 Apr 2003 11:30:33 +0900 (JST) Received: from mcspd15.ucom.lsi.nec.co.jp (mcspd15 [10.30.114.174]) by mcsss2.ucom.lsi.nec.co.jp (8.12.8/8.12.8/EDcg v2.01-mc/1046780839) with ESMTP id h332UXNH004215; Thu, 3 Apr 2003 11:30:33 +0900 (JST) Received: by mcspd15.ucom.lsi.nec.co.jp (Postfix, from userid 31295) id E0E5F3724; Thu, 3 Apr 2003 11:30:32 +0900 (JST) To: Andrew Cagney Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: testing current target (in gdb code) References: <3E8AF77E.3040102@redhat.com> Reply-To: Miles Bader System-Type: i686-pc-linux-gnu Blat: Foop From: Miles Bader Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2003 02:30:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <3E8AF77E.3040102@redhat.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-SW-Source: 2003-04/txt/msg00036.txt.bz2 Andrew Cagney writes: > > So I'd like to use GDB's software-single-stepping facility for those > > cases where I can't use hardware (thanks to Kevin Buettner who told me > > where to find it!); however, I'd still like to use hardware > > single-stepping when possible as it seems likely to always be reliable > > in some corner case or another, no matter how careful I am. > > See: SOFTWARE_SINGLE_STEP is backwards/sideways That's interesting, and it's good to see that the gdb maintainers are thinking about it (the suggested change sounds great to me), but is such a change likely to happen any time soon? If not, I guess I've got to play by the old cranky rules... Anyway, it looks like there's some relevant discussion in the ML archives so hopefully I can find some tips there (yeah I know I ought to do that _before_ posting my question... :-) Thanks, -Miles -- Next to fried food, the South has suffered most from oratory. -- Walter Hines Page