Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 8 Apr 2014 14:24:35 -0700
From:      Steve Kargl <sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>
To:        Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com>
Cc:        freebsd-arch <freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: Time for turning off gdb by default? Or worse...
Message-ID:  <20140408212435.GA75404@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>
In-Reply-To: <DD38131E-9A43-4EFA-A27D-ED6B64F6A35A@bsdimp.com>
References:  <DD38131E-9A43-4EFA-A27D-ED6B64F6A35A@bsdimp.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Apr 08, 2014 at 02:34:35PM -0600, Warner Losh wrote:

(courtesy line wrap to something well below 80 characters)

> The gdb in the tree seems to be of very limited usefulness
> these days. It doesn?t seem to work on clang-enabled
> architectures w/o building -gdwarf-2, it doesn?t seem to work
> with threaded applications, and on some architectures it
> doesn?t seem to work at all (mips comes to mind, but it may
> have been the two binaries I tried).
> 

(patch removed)

> to the tree, which will turn gdb off by default.  It may make
> more sense to just remove it entirely, but I?m not sure I want
> to go there just yet in case there are things that I?m missing.
> I believe that the port will be adequate for all architectures
> we support, but haven?t tested this directly yet. I do know
> that on amd64, the port just worked, where the in-tree gdb
> was an epic fail.

I suppose the obvious questions are:

1) Is lldb ready for prime time?

2) What effect does this have on kgdb?  Note, /sys/conf/NOTES contains

#makeoptions	DEBUG=-g		#Build kernel with gdb(1) debug symbols

Should this be updates to DEBUG=-gdwarf-2?

PS: You'll need to sweep src/ for references to gdb(1).

-- 
Steve



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20140408212435.GA75404>