Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [cdt-dev] RE: Something for DSF GDB feature-parity with CDI GDB?

ouch. that's actually a huge one. Without it, you can't set breakpoints in shared libraries, no?

On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 11:58 AM, Marc Khouzam <marc.khouzam@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
So we do have a parity issue.
I'll add it back to the list.

From: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Doug Schaefer
Sent: Thursday, April 08, 2010 1:45 PM

To: CDT General developers list.
Subject: Re: [cdt-dev] RE: Something for DSF GDB feature-parity with CDI GDB?

On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 9:59 AM, Marc Khouzam <marc.khouzam@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Let us know if you have any other issues.
> Well, the missing support for pending breakpoints certainly
> needs fixing ... ;-)

Yes, this one is a popular one (it even has 4 votes).
Although, as per (copied below)
it is not a feature-parity problem because CDI doesn't do it either :-)

That's actually a semantically incorrect statement. The CDI/MI integration implemented it's own pending breakpoint solution attempting to set breakpoints on every shared library load event. If DSF/GDB does that too, then I'd say you have parity.

cdt-dev mailing list

Back to the top