Mail Archives: cygwin/2001/10/08/15:04:01
On Mon, Oct 08, 2001 at 12:40:24PM -0400, Ken Thompson wrote:
>At 12:24 PM 10/8/2001 -0400, you wrote:
>>Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mon, Oct 08, 2001 at 10:31:28AM -0400, John Peacock wrote:
>>> >There are two issues:
>>> >
>>> >1) CygWin 1.3.3 breaks gdb under Win2K (cannot set breakpoints);
>>>
>>> No, it doesn't. You may have problems using gdb for some reason but I
>>> use gdb on a daily basis on W2K with no problems.
>>>
>>> As always, I can't fix what I can't debug. This, of course, means
>>> that the debugging is left to people who have the problem.
>>>
>>> Said people seem to be incapable of doing more than complaining about
>>> the problem and posting stack traces, however. So, as always, this bug
>>> will go unfixed because everyone who experiences the problem is "too
>>> busy", "too disgusted", "too apathetic", or "too unknowledgeable" to fix
>>> the problem.
>>>
>>> cgf
>>
>>My initial response to this message is "FUCK YOU" but I'm sure this
>>would be perceived as overly hostile, which is of course _your_
>>problem.
>>
>>I am too busy working on patches to Perl to make it ready to ship 5.8
>>to debug CygWin. I like CygWin; I use CygWin every day; nonetheless,
>>it is a minor platform in the Perl universe. I have even seen a note
>>from a developer imploring others to NOT port his software to Win32
>>platform , EVEN UNDER CYGWIN, because the platform is so limited. I
>>am stuck with Win2K/NT as a corporate limitation so I guess I am stuck
>>with CygWin.
>>
>>What I posted was not "It doesn't work for me" but was EVERYTHING I
>>COULD THINK OF that might help someone HELP ME. I searched the
>>archives and found several other people foolish enough to post and
>>the deafening silence from anyone who might know what was going on.
>>My posting has exactly 1 followup, and that was from me.
>>
>>I am so happy that gdb debugging works for you using 1.3.3-2 or are
>>you using a snapshot or CVS copy? You don't say, presumably because
>>you are TOO FUCKING IMPORTANT to talk to the plebes. It does not work
>>for me and only replacing 1.3.3 with 1.3.2 fixes it. Therefore, I
>>think I am on pretty safe ground saying that 1.3.3-2 breaks gdb
>>debugging for Perl. That is a qualified statement, since you don't
>>seem to recognize that I'll repeat it:
>
>Note. This is not what you said the first time. This is what you said the
>first time
>
>CygWin 1.3.3 breaks gdb under Win2K (cannot set breakpoints);
>
>Chris pointed out that this is not true. You then changed your
>statement. I suppose if someone else cannot reproduce your problem with
>Perl you will change your statement again. Why should anyone attempt to
>debug your problem if you are unwilling to narrow it down to something that
>they can reproduce. After all this is a free software project.
In John's defense, however, he did previously post a detailed message
concerning his problem, however.
I do tend to react strongly when people make strong unqualified
erroneous statements, though. Judging by the last month of discussion
it is obviously not true that gdb can't set breakpoints. John (and at
least one other person) is obviously having a problem and he has now
again qualified what the problem is.
cgf
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
- Raw text -