[uClinux-dev] gdbserver kills the shell?

Stuart Hughes stuarth at freescale.com
Thu Oct 6 03:56:09 EDT 2005


Hi John,

I sent a second patch yesterday which is much closer to the one you have 
just sent (as it's based on Miles' patches).  Did you see my second 
posting ?

The difference in the 2 sets of patches I sent can be explained by the 
fact the first was extracted from the older 
uClinux-dist-20041215.tar.bz2 and the second on 
uClinux-dist-test-20050906.tar.bz2 (Miles Bader based).

I'll try your patches and let you know.

Regards, Stuart


John Williams wrote:
> Hi Stuart,
> 
> Stuart Hughes wrote:
> 
>>Here's a patch based on Miles Bader's.  I've removed the v850 sections
>>to try to make it just a nommu patch.
>>
>>Again, this is against vanilla gdb-6.0.
> 
> 
> The version of gdb now in the uClinux-dist (/usr/gdb) appears to be 6.3.
>  I manually merged Miles' older patches into this without too much
> trouble, and it seems to work ok for microblaze at least.  The main
> changes are the fork->vrofk, adding config.srv target, and introducing
> support for the qOffset remote packet type.
> 
> What's odd is the way this was done in his original patches is quite
> different in form (if not function) to the patch that you have sent.
> 
> One notable difference in the version you have is use of hard coded
> ptrace(PTRACE_PEEKUSR,...)  offsets for the TEXT, DATA and BSS queries,
> rather than the PT_TEXT_ADDR, _DATA_ADDR and _BSS_ADDR macros that are
> defined in linux-2.4.x/include/asm/ptrace.h
> 
> I guess this is just versionitis, both on patches and base gdb versions.
>  I agree with DaveM's sentiments that we should track the latest,
> whatever that may be.  From where I'm sitting, that looks like gdb6.3
> that is currently in uClinux-dist.  I've attached my patches, can you
> try them at your end, and see how they look?
> 



More information about the uClinux-dev mailing list