Re: GDB and new kernels

Benjamin Saller Bender (case@loki.appliedtheory.com)
Tue, 20 May 1997 15:26:38 -0400

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: Niels Provos: "recvfrom with MSG_PEEK"
Previous message: Jim Nance: "Re: Linux QA tests (was Re: SMP Linux-37-5)"
Maybe in reply to: Benjamin Saller Bender: "GDB and new kernels"
Next in thread: H. Peter Anvin: "Re: GDB and new kernels"

Alan Cox <mailto:alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> writes:
>Linux threads have an own pid, so ptrace handles thread tracing nicely, even
>though gdb doesnt

Does this mean that work on CLONE_PID is abandoned? I assume we will
need this functionality at some point , not to mention that it is suppose to
be much more efficient.
I honestly don't know what the future tid/pid mapping for Linux are
expected to look like, but I expect a /proc based GDB would be a plus
reguardless.

Thanks

-- 
Benjamin Saller Bender 			<case@AppliedTheory.com>
AppliedTheory Communications		Software Engineering Group
http://AppliedTheory.com/               Sentio aliquos togatos contra me conspirare.

Next message: Niels Provos: "recvfrom with MSG_PEEK"
Previous message: Jim Nance: "Re: Linux QA tests (was Re: SMP Linux-37-5)"
Maybe in reply to: Benjamin Saller Bender: "GDB and new kernels"
Next in thread: H. Peter Anvin: "Re: GDB and new kernels"