Re: [cdt-dev] Debugging with Mac (was: About default debuggers, etc)

[Doug Schaefer <cdtdoug@xxxxxxxxx>]

Great work guys! Thank you. I'm seeing more and more SDKs for mobile available on the Mac, we should be prepared for more users who want to do that and do Mac apps too.

Doug.

On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 4:24 PM, Marc Khouzam <marc.khouzam@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hi,

I'm happy to report that the two last bugs that were causing problems
with DSF-GDB on Mac have now been resolved.

> Reasons to choose CDI over DSF-GDB on Mac
> - CDI works with paths containing spaces (DSF bug 263689) -> FIXED
> - Insert breakpoint while running (DSF bug 242943) -> FIXED

Furthermore, a new command factory has been added to DSF-GDB to allow
for easy changes (for Mac or others) (Bug 304146)

I believe there are no currently known problems with debugging on Mac
with DSF-GDB.

Please report if there are any issues that I'm not aware of.

A big thank you to Marc-Andre Laperle for his patience in writing and
testing many patches.

Marc



> -----Original Message-----
> From: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Marc-Andre Laperle
> Sent: February-04-10 6:04 PM
> To: CDT General developers list.
> Subject: [cdt-dev] About default debuggers, etc
>
> I'm not sure which thread to reply to :p
>
> I strongly feel that the base CDT needs to be easy to use and
> have defaults. The user shouldn't need to read the wiki or
> the mailing list to choose a launcher and start debugging.
>
> About Mac, it's great that CDI is getting patched for 6.0.2
> but DSF-GDB in 7.0 is one patch away (bug 301720) from being
> slightly better IMO since threading will work better if I
> can't find a way to patch bug 269838.
>
> Reasons to choose CDI over DSF-GDB on Mac
> - CDI works with paths containing spaces (DSF bug 263689)
> - Insert breakpoint while running (DSF bug 242943)
>
> Reasons to choose DSF-GDB over CDI on Mac
> - Threading works better *now* (301720 has a patch for DSF,
> 269838 has a patch for CDI which breaks 250037)
>
> I think we should wait a bit (a couple of weeks?) before
> choosing the default for 7.0 and see how the two evolve. I'm
> all for DSF-GDB if it will be better maintained but I like
> how in CDI I can override a single command using the factory
> with the extension
> (org.eclipse.cdt.debug.mi.core.commandFactories). In this
> sense, I feel like DSF-GDB is less extensible.
>
> About EDC, the fact that I can't use it on my PC worries me a
> bit (bug 301659). I like the fact that you don't need to
> install a seperate debugger, though. I will continue to test
> EDC (in a VM, sigh...) and report bugs and enhancements. I
> feel that if EDC becomes the default launcher for Windows,
> this will put CDT in a corner and be harder to maintain. By
> using using MinGW's debugger, CDT benefits from the work of
> existing communities (FSF, MinGW and others using  MinGW's
> GDB like Code::Blocks). I want to improve debugging on
> Windows but it would be great to know which one to contribute
> to (CDI, DSF-GDB or EDC).
>
> Marc-Andre
> _______________________________________________
> 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