Message-ID:	<3696AB40.CDA81D7C@gmx.net>
Date:	Sat, 09 Jan 1999 00:05:05 -0100
From:	Robert Hoehne <robert DOT hoehne AT gmx DOT net>
Organization:	none provided
X-Mailer:	Mozilla 4.07 [de] (Win95; I)
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	Pierre Muller <muller AT cerbere DOT u-strasbg DOT fr>
CC:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: debug GDB with itself
References:	<3 DOT 0 DOT 5 DOT 32 DOT 19981223172811 DOT 00aa0bc0 AT ics DOT u-strasbg DOT fr>
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com

Pierre Muller wrote :
> 
>    Following Eli Zaretskii proposals I send you
> I context diff for
> 
>    include/debug/dbgcom.h
>   and
> 
>    src/debug/common/dbgcom.c

Now I took some time to check your patches.

Why do you such complicated things when saving/restoring
the FPU? If you look in src/debug/fsdb/fullscr.c you will
find already a versiion of saving/restoring the FPU which seems
to me much shorter and better to look at.

To your exception handler hooking I cannot say so much,
since I can't overlook it, but if I see it right, you are
disabling at all, that the debugged program can hook the
keyboard interrupt (0x09). Is this right? If yes, I don't
think this is good, since many people use allegro and allegro
hooks that intterupt.

>   Concerning the diffs for the GDB sources these are quite big
> and are in the second file
>   (note that this patch has been made by cvs

At first, it is good to send patches here in the workers
list, but in general they should go also to the gdb maintainer.

Please make separate patches for separate features. It is
not good to have all patches in one big file, especially if
most of the patches are for the pascal extensions and only
some few for the DJGPP related topics.

Your cvs seems to be a little bit confused, since it shows
very often for the original part of the patch something like

!    System headers sometimes define this.

!    We just want to avoid a redefinition error message.  */

where it means probably

!    System headers sometimes define this.
!    We just want to avoid a redefinition error message.  */

(probably a CR <-> CR/LF problem) With this, it shows for
instance, that the file go32targ.c has chnaged _completely_,
which is probably not true, but so I couldn't see _your_
changes.

Why do you include in the gdb patches again the dbgcom patches?

>   Any comments on my modifications are very welcome, but

I hope, I wasn't too late, but I'm also very interested
in this topic since I have already a working gdb 4.17 for
my own (where I implemented for instance also the FPU stuff).
But I simply hadn't found the time yet to send my patches to
the gdb mainatainer and then making a DJGPP distrib.

Robert
-- 
******************************************************
* email:   Robert Hoehne <robert DOT hoehne AT gmx DOT net>     *
* Post:    Am Berg 3, D-09573 Dittmannsdorf, Germany *
* WWW:     http://www.tu-chemnitz.de/~sho/rho        *
******************************************************

- Raw text -