X-Recipient:	archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
X-Original-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
DMARC-Filter:	OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 0FCC03858430
Authentication-Results:	sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none)
	header.from=dronecode.org.uk
Authentication-Results:	sourceware.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=dronecode.org.uk
Authentication-Results:	btinternet.com;
	auth=pass (PLAIN) smtp.auth=jonturney AT btinternet DOT com;
	bimi=skipped
X-SNCR-Rigid:	613A8DE82E332B06
X-Originating-IP:	[86.139.167.41]
X-OWM-Source-IP:	86.139.167.41 (GB)
X-OWM-Env-Sender:	jonturney AT btinternet DOT com
X-VadeSecure-score:	verdict=clean score=0/300, class=clean
X-RazorGate-Vade:	gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvfedrudeiledgvdefucetufdoteggodetrfdotffvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuueftkffvkffujffvgffngfevqffopdfqfgfvnecuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddunecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenucfjughrpefkffggfgfuvfhfhfgjtgfgsehtjeertddtfeejnecuhfhrohhmpeflohhnucfvuhhrnhgvhicuoehjohhnrdhtuhhrnhgvhiesughrohhnvggtohguvgdrohhrghdruhhkqeenucggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpeehudeuveeujeeujeegueefhedttdekvedtudeileefteetfeefjeejudekfefggfenucffohhmrghinheptgihghifihhnrdgtohhmnecukfhppeekiedrudefledrudeijedrgedunecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehhvghloheplgduledvrdduieekrddurddutdehngdpihhnvghtpeekiedrudefledrudeijedrgedupdhmrghilhhfrhhomhepjhhonhdrthhurhhnvgihsegurhhonhgvtghouggvrdhorhhgrdhukhdpnhgspghrtghpthhtohepvddprhgtphhtthhopegthihgfihinhestgihghifihhnrdgtohhmpdhrtghpthhtoheplhgrvhhrsehntggsihdrnhhlmhdrnhhihhdrghhovh
X-RazorGate-Vade-Verdict:	clean 0
X-RazorGate-Vade-Classification:	clean
Message-ID:	<359ba48f-5480-2ca5-84e0-50e1f1ac8141@dronecode.org.uk>
Date:	Sat, 9 Jul 2022 11:00:29 +0100
MIME-Version:	1.0
User-Agent:	Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
	Thunderbird/91.11.0
Subject:	Re: dumper does not produce core that gdb recognizes?
To:	"Lavrentiev, Anton (NIH/NLM/NCBI) [C]" <lavr AT ncbi DOT nlm DOT nih DOT gov>,
	The Cygwin Mailing List <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
References:	<DM8PR09MB709546504D09F5207B1D4635A5859 AT DM8PR09MB7095 DOT namprd09 DOT prod DOT outlook DOT com>
From:	Jon Turney <jon DOT turney AT dronecode DOT org DOT uk>
In-Reply-To:	<DM8PR09MB709546504D09F5207B1D4635A5859@DM8PR09MB7095.namprd09.prod.outlook.com>
X-Spam-Status:	No, score=-3570.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, FORGED_SPF_HELO,
	KAM_DMARC_STATUS, KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY, NICE_REPLY_A, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,
	SPF_HELO_PASS, SPF_NONE, TXREP,
	T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6
X-Spam-Checker-Version:	SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on
	server2.sourceware.org
X-BeenThere:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
X-Mailman-Version:	2.1.29
List-Id:	General Cygwin discussions and problem reports <cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Unsubscribe:	<https://cygwin.com/mailman/options/cygwin>,
	<mailto:cygwin-request AT cygwin DOT com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive:	<https://cygwin.com/pipermail/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-request AT cygwin DOT com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe:	<https://cygwin.com/mailman/listinfo/cygwin>,
	<mailto:cygwin-request AT cygwin DOT com?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To:	cygwin-bounces+archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com
Sender:	"Cygwin" <cygwin-bounces+archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com>

On 09/07/2022 01:58, Lavrentiev, Anton (NIH/NLM/NCBI) [C] via Cygwin wrote:
>> The latest version of gdb that is not a test version is 11.2. But
>> you are using 9.2.
> 
> I am using the older dumper as well, my working cygwin is not cutting edge.
> 
> $ dumper -V
> dumper (cygwin) 3.2.0
> 
> What I am coming at is that if dumper is not consistent with gdb,
> that does not make any sense.  They should always be consistent at
> any given time, so if the packages (dumper's and gdb's) installed together,
> they would be able to cooperate. 

Ideally, that would be the case.

Unfortunately, for a long time, on x86_64, dumper wasn't working 
correctly, and gdb couldn't read those dumps, and nobody cared enough to 
do anything about it.

This was fixed in gdb-10.1-1 [1] (upstream in gdb 11) and cygwin 3.1.7.

If you choose to use earlier versions on x86_64, it's a known defect 
that it won't work.

[1] https://cygwin.com/pipermail/cygwin-announce/2020-October/009752.html

-- 
Problem reports:      https://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                  https://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:        https://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:     https://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple

- Raw text -