[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [cdt-dev] Upcoming CDT Service Release and OS X Debugging.

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,
Tobias


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 
>> Debugging.
>> 
>> 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:
>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> 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 
>>> committed.
>>> 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 
>> versions.
>>> I have opened http://bugs.eclipse.org/298883 to track that 
>> effort.   
>>> 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 
>>> written.
>>> 
>>> Let's try to have DSF-GDB debugging properly on OS X for Helios.
>>> 
>>> Marc
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> -----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@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>> cdt-dev mailing list
>>> cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> cdt-dev mailing list
>> cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev
>> _______________________________________________
> cdt-dev mailing list
> cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev