Mail Archives: djgpp/2001/04/10/12:45:11
Dennis Yelle <dennis51 AT jps DOT net> wrote:
[...]
> Thanks for the suggestion, -gstabs definitely changes
> the behavior of gdb. It still does not work the
> way I want it to, or the way I expect it to.
How *does* it work, then? Please try to be a bit less mysterious. What
is the change in behaviour, and what's still not like you want or
expect it?
> My understanding is that the command 'n' is 'step over'. That is,
> if the next line to be executed is line 20, and line 20 calls a
> function, or method, then the 'n' command would be equivalent to
> setting a breakpoint on line 21 and running the program until line
> 21 is reached.
Right.
The problem I currently suspect to be hitting you is that due to bugs
in other parts of the setup (at least one upload of gcc-2.95.3
binaries, in particular), the debugging informations found in the
executable might be so confusing for GDB that it takes much longer
than it usually would to locate where a "breakpoint on line 21"
actually has to be put.
Another possibility: you could have a .gdb_init file sitting around
from earlier work, containing a software watchpoint or whatever.
"info break" should tell you about that.
--
Hans-Bernhard Broeker (broeker AT physik DOT rwth-aachen DOT de)
Even if all the snow were burnt, ashes would remain.
- Raw text -