This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Archer project.
- From: Phil Muldoon <pmuldoon at redhat dot com>
- To: Chris Moller <cmoller at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Project Archer <archer at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2008 21:14:42 +0000
- Subject: Re: froggy
- References: <49397D14.email@example.com>
Chris Moller wrote:
This is a note I sent to Tom and Eric last night:
This suggests to me that the right thing to do isn't to piecemeal
replace all the ptrace calls with froggy_ptrace--functionally, this buys
us almost nothing other than the ability to aay "we don't use ptrace,"
and it slows things down.
I suspect the real answer is to write a new
gdb backend, based on gdb/config/i386/linux.mh (and, I guess,
gdb/config/i386/linux64.h). (Judging from something you said a while
back, this may have been obvious to you all along; I just got my Aha! a
couple hours ago.)
Are you sure that there aren't ptrace semantics elsewhere in the code?
Or perhaps harder to track down ... code that relies on ptrace
semantics? We were discussing breakpoints and instruction stepping in
the meeting and this would seem like a prime area. Because ...
I've spent the last hour or so looking over the code represented by the
linux.mh config and adapting it to froggy is a long way from
trivial--several months, at a minimum, possibly as much as six months or
After a bit more discussion today, it looks like this is the way we'll
go. Eric would like to see it ready for Fedora 11, which freezes in
For a shippable product in Fedora 11 that surpasses or equals the
reliability of existing GDB in Fedora 10, this seems a little aggressive
to me. Tracking regressions in the GDB and utrace test-suites with
these changes and triaging the bugs will be a huge job. I don't wish to
be negative energy - I think this is a great project, and am looking
forward to it. But the alpha freeze for F11 is 2009-01-20 and the beta
freeze is 2009-03-10 (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/11/Schedule)
All being said, looking forward to it!