RE: Patch that provides true single step for multi-threaded /procbased processes (Tru64 5.1A)

["Tonny Madsen" <Tonny dot Madsen at nettest dot com>]

Andrew,

Please sent me the copyright assigments and I will fill them out.

Unfortunately, the thread patch doesn't always work -- I have yet to
figure out the conditions and the reasons. I have been in contact with
the ladebug group at Compaq (or HP or whatever these days), but they
seem to have the same problem as the one I try to solve. Hmmm... Do you
know of anybody that has knowledge of the /proc filesystem on this
level?

I have a new patch for you, which solves a problem under Tru64 where
some symbols for static functionss are not in the local symbol table,
but still represented in the procedure table (along with the proper
frame size, return register, etc...). As the system libaries have many
of these anonymous function, it can be very difficult to debug core
files as the signal code includes some of these anonymous functions as
well.

Should I just send the patch to the gdb-patch list or somewhere else? In
which format? Any additional requirements?

/tonny

-----Original Message-----
From: Andrew Cagney [mailto:ac131313@ges.redhat.com] 
Sent: Monday, 05 August, 2002 01:56
To: Tonny Madsen; Jim blandy; Joel Brobecker
Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com; Tonny Madsen
Subject: Re: Patch that provides true single step for multi-threaded
/procbased processes (Tru64 5.1A)


Tonny,

I don't see any copyright assignment (to the FSF) for you, sigh.  JimB 
can send you some paperwork to fill out.

Can I also suggest looking through the GNU coding standards while the 
paper work gets sorted out.

I suspect JoelB will be very interested in this patch.

enjoy,
Andrew