[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [cdt-dev] Upcoming CDT Service Release and OS X Debugging.
- From: Tobias Hahn <tobias.hahn@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 05 Jan 2010 23:43:02 +0100
- Delivered-to: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ableton.com; s=mail_2009081900; h=Date:To:References:Message-Id:Content-Transfer-Encoding:In-Reply-To:From:Subject:Mime-Version:Content-Type; bh=Ruub0WZNPPlJ6LWK5aiW3HSEqzjNfZiTjks87I5zZWI=; b=qvTdSoRRbOWHiUmoAjXdlCNwmM84jJlehfY8+OiTBQ8hxTHHsLRH/MA4NMUjJ8Ly2OjGLmL32fcBntNxC92ZQb4+H4iBT1en/4WyrF5hrzqsCXXcvnyVPJNKzaSKuzPqkcMQkOrTTDvjOGt28VCYIBu1V2euTR29tI9S7JO8/rE=;
My personal experience when I last tried was that CDI had different but less issues than DSF with apple's gdb. The 'cause' for all the trouble on OS X is not CDI support rotting, but rather that apple decided about 5 years ago that it will stick with gdb 6.3.50-20050815 forever, neither merging bugfixes nor enhancements from fsf, and just making it good enough to support XCode. (Edit and continue anyone?)
Otoh, fsf-gdb development has continued over the past 5 years, and so naturally these two gdbs will diverge more and more over time. If I am not mistaken, gdb-DSF support was designed with a current fsf-gdb in mind. So naturally, I would expect more issues with the more modern DSF, and less with the legacy CDI. Not to discourage anyone from starting to support apple-gdb-DSF. It is the right way to go IMHO, but it definitely won't be for free.
Just my 2ct,
Am 05.01.2010 um 22:20 schrieb Marc Khouzam:
> Maybe, with a little luck, those issues won't be present when using DSF-GDB.
> But you'll have to give it a try...
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> [mailto:cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Michael Jackson
>> Sent: January-05-10 12:59 PM
>> To: CDT General developers list.
>> Subject: Re: [cdt-dev] Upcoming CDT Service Release and OS X
>> So, How hard is it going to be to "port" a CDI patch to the
>> DSF Framework? My initial thought is that all the hard work
>> that went into creating those patches will have to be redone.
>> It took long enough to get those in the first place.
>> I know no one is working on CDI but is it possible to get
>> the patches applied for the 6.0.2 service release? I guess
>> the other way is to temporarily "fork" until Helios is
>> release with (hopefully) fixing debugging. I would really
>> hate to do that but the OS X Users are really working with an
>> inferior product at this point and the possibility of having
>> something so close to working properly is just killing me.
>> Mike Jackson mike.jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> On Jan 5, 2010, at 12:40 PM, Marc Khouzam wrote:
>>> Mike is right that we agreed on a way forward for debugging
>> with OS X.
>>> Here is what we agreed on.
>>> First, fixing things for CDI is tricky because there is not
>> really any
>>> active committers working on CDI. This is not just for OS
>> X, but for
>>> CDI in general.
>>> So, to get OS X debugging working, we'd like to help the community
>>> move away from CDI and towards DSF-GDB. We hope that if
>> patches are
>>> written for DSF-GDB, they will have a better chance of being
>>> To make this easier still, Pawel had the good idea of
>> creating a set
>>> of services specific to Apple's version of GDB. This will allow to
>>> commit patches specific to OS X without affecting other GDB
>>> I have opened http://bugs.eclipse.org/298883 to track that
>>> I will
>>> try to have a patch ready this week.
>>> Once that is ready, it will be up to the interested members of the
>>> community to try debugging with DSF-GDB and OS X and
>> getting patches
>>> Let's try to have DSF-GDB debugging properly on OS X for Helios.
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>>> [mailto:cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Michael Jackson
>>>> Sent: January-05-10 12:14 PM
>>>> To: CDT General developers list.
>>>> Subject: [cdt-dev] Upcoming CDT Service Release and OS X Debugging.
>>>> From the CDT conference call today it seems that there is a plan
>>>> going forward to shape up the OS X Debugging experience.
>>>> I'll let someone else run through the details as my notes
>> are shaky
>>>> at best.
>>>> But what I did take away from the call is that the
>> implementation may
>>>> take some time? With the next service release coming up I would be
>>>> curious if the non-DSF patches could be committed so at
>> least some of
>>>> the major debugging "Bugs" are fixed for the next service release?
>>>> Thoughts and comments? The slow start up of the debugger and the
>>>> thread-info seem like pretty low hanging fruit.
>>>> Also, from the call it sounds like some of the issues with
>>>> supporting OS X is not lack of hardware (someone on the call
>>>> mentioned they use CDT on their Mac) but the lack of
>> Developer time
>>>> to check patches, review code and/or actually debug
>> issues? Is that a
>>>> fair statement?
>>>> Mike Jackson mike.jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>> BlueQuartz Software www.bluequartz.net
>>>> Principal Software Engineer Dayton, Ohio
>>>> cdt-dev mailing list
>>> cdt-dev mailing list
>> cdt-dev mailing list
> cdt-dev mailing list