dbx [was: Re: STDCXX-1056 [was: Re: STDCXX forks]]

2012-09-07 Thread Liviu Nicoara

On 09/07/12 11:58, Stefan Teleman wrote:

On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 8:52 AM, Liviu Nicoara nikko...@hates.ms wrote:

On 09/06/12 19:54, Martin Sebor wrote:



Also, does the 27.objects test pass with this patch?



No, it does not. It hangs at the first insertion, line 227. Unfortunately, I
cannot debug it because dbx does not work properly in my installation.


What are the symptoms with dbx mishbehaving? (maybe I can help).


Thanks!

I get this when launching the debugger:

$ dbx -xexec32 t
For information about new features see `help changes'
To remove this message, put `dbxenv suppress_startup_message 7.9' in your .dbxrc
Reading t
Reading ld-linux.so.2
dbx: fetch at 0xf400 failed -- Input/output error
dbx: warning: could not put in breakpoint
dbx: warning: internal handler (-80) made defunct -- could not enable event BPT
dbx: warning: internal handler (-86) made defunct -- could not enable event BPT
...

Then the program just runs from the get go. If I set breakpoints and rerun, it 
ignores them.

Also, long running programs cannot be broken into with C-c:

^Cdbx: warning: Interrupt ignored but forwarded to child.
signal INT in (unknown) at 0xf77cf6c4
0xf77cf6c4: movl %edx,%eax
dbx: warning: 'stop' ignored -- while doing rtld handshake
terminating signal 2 SIGINT
dbx: warning: 'stop' ignored -- while doing rtld handshake
(dbx) where
dbx: program is not active
(dbx)

Liviu


Re: dbx [was: Re: STDCXX-1056 [was: Re: STDCXX forks]]

2012-09-07 Thread Stefan Teleman
On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 12:23 PM, Liviu Nicoara nikko...@hates.ms wrote:

 I get this when launching the debugger:

 $ dbx -xexec32 t
 For information about new features see `help changes'
 To remove this message, put `dbxenv suppress_startup_message 7.9' in your
 .dbxrc
 Reading t
 Reading ld-linux.so.2
 dbx: fetch at 0xf400 failed -- Input/output error
 dbx: warning: could not put in breakpoint

There is fix for this, but for Studio 12.2:

http://wesunsolve.net/bugid/id/6545393

It had priority 5 (very low) so that leads me to assume that it hasn't
been fixed yet in 12.3. But I will ask at work about 12.3/Linux.

Strangely enough, I don't get the error on Fedora 17 with 12.3.

--Stefan

-- 
Stefan Teleman
KDE e.V.
stefan.tele...@gmail.com