Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > > From: Francesco Potorti` <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 12:27:11 +0100 > > > > (gdb) p/x current_buffer->auto_save_file_name > > $59 = 0x1827b31c > > (gdb) xstring > > $60 = (struct Lisp_String *) 0x827b31c > > Segmentation fault (core dumped) > > Does GDB's core file say something interesting about where did GDB > crash? > > Anyway, since no one responded, let me rephrase the (implicit) > question in Francesco's report: Is GDB supposed to handle invalid > memory accesses gracefully? That is, if the user asks GDB to access > the inferior's memory via an invalid pointer, does GDB protect itself > against SIGSEGV and other related calamities?
An illegal memory access in the child will not cause a signal in the parent. If GDB gets a segv, it is because of some bad pointer or data structure within GDB, not because of accessing a bad address in the child. _______________________________________________ Bug-gdb mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gdb
