Andrew Lentvorski wrote: > The main problem is just that developing something like gdb is hard. > It requires initimate knowledge of processor architecture, binary > API's, and linkers. There just aren't that many people capable of > doing that, and they normally get paid by companies. Not at all. gdb can get you a long way without knowledge of such things, provided your language abstracts those bits out. > The second problem is that since x86 has historically been register > starved, it doesn't bother to keep a "frame pointer" which allows > tracking the stack, adding extra intercepts, etc. That's not true. It does do that unless you use the -fomit-frame-pointer optimization when compiling.
--Chris -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-lpsg
