Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2001 08:35:41 -0400
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: GDB breaks in 1.3.3-2 on certain Win2000 machines -- something to try
Message-ID: <20011010083541.A17407@redhat.com>
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References: <30BDEE18E474D511BB0A00D0B7BB87AF09294A AT camel DOT mha DOT ca> <20011009212908 DOT A30223 AT redhat DOT com> <20011009230656 DOT A15171 AT redhat DOT com> <3BC40ED6 DOT 6090603 AT hplb DOT hpl DOT hp DOT com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <3BC40ED6.6090603@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.21i

On Wed, Oct 10, 2001 at 10:03:18AM +0100, Bill Petheram wrote:
>gdb doesn't work for me on Win2k. I am building a debug verion of gdb 
>and 1.3.3-2. I hope to have more info late.

You are responding to a message where I indicated that I added some
extra debugging to the CVS/snapshot version of cygwin.  I didn't
retroactively add it to 1.3.3.

Why are you responding to a message indicating that there is an updated
version to try with the announcement that you are going to try the old
version?

cgf

>'cgf AT redhat DOT com' wrote:
>>Just in case this got lost in my previous long-winded email, it would be
>>helpful if people could try the latest cygwin snapshot and report if the
>>problem has changed.
>>
>>It would be even more helpful if people could build a debugging version
>>of cygwin and report on the gdb stack trace, if it still fails.  I
>>suspect that it *will* still fail as I didn't really do anything
>>substantial that would have fixed the problem.
>>
>>However, the stack trace should now be slightly more informative.

--
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/