X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 05:07:00 -0700 From: clayne AT anodized DOT com To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: 1.5.19: changes have broken Qt3 Message-ID: <20060524120700.GL13907@ns1.anodized.com> References: <20060524100500 DOT GK13907 AT ns1 DOT anodized DOT com> <04c801c67f1e$8b4c7cf0$a501a8c0 AT CAM DOT ARTIMI DOT COM> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <04c801c67f1e$8b4c7cf0$a501a8c0@CAM.ARTIMI.COM> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 X-Assp-Spam-Prob: 0.00000 X-Assp-Whitelisted: Yes X-Assp-Envelope-From: clayne AT ns1 DOT anodized DOT com X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com On Wed, May 24, 2006 at 11:40:58AM +0100, Dave Korn wrote: > > Actually, is this really a fault in gdb? Cygwin is throwing a SIGSEGV > > signal, correct? GDB does what it's told, stops on SIGSEGV by default. > > > > -cl > > But it doesn't interact properly with cygwin's exception handling -> signal > mechanism, and the task dies, when it should just run on. > > Anyone who's doing any serious debugging on Cygwin very seriously wants to > build their own gdb and insight from current CVS. It's much improved of late. Right, or bless their sanity - as it won't last long. But I'm just trying to debate that it's no "lacking" of gdb that it's catching SIGSEGV signals which are being artificially generated by cygwin. What's the design mechanism for the entire 'check for non-initialized space and segfault if uninitialized' when it comes to statically initialized pthreads objects in the first place, btw? Why not just have pthread_mutex_t (for example actually be a pthread_mutex_t instead of it being a type'd pointer to the real pthread_mutex_t? Why dynamically initialize space for it at all via the check bunk memory->throw fault->alloc real memory for real pthread_mutex_t as opposed to "initialiize the mutex->if bunk space, segfault as usual" ? -cl -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/