> I've learned that once I get a setup that seems to be stable
That's what I thought about my 3.2.0 setup, too, but following your own
conclusions about the rolling release, one can never be sure...
Anyways, maybe it's time for me to upgrade. I did not because it looked
like 3.3 was coming out
On 09/07/2022 01:58, Lavrentiev, Anton (NIH/NLM/NCBI) [C] via Cygwin wrote:
The latest version of gdb that is not a test version is 11.2. But
you are using 9.2.
I am using the older dumper as well, my working cygwin is not cutting edge.
$ dumper -V
dumper (cygwin) 3.2.0
What I am coming at
On 2022-07-08 19:31, Backwoods BC wrote:
On Fri, Jul 8, 2022 at 5:59 PM Lavrentiev, Anton (NIH/NLM/NCBI) wrote:
The latest version of gdb that is not a test version is 11.2. But
you are using 9.2.
I am using the older dumper as well, my working cygwin is not cutting edge.
$ dumper -V
dumper
On Fri, Jul 8, 2022 at 5:59 PM Lavrentiev, Anton (NIH/NLM/NCBI) [C]
via Cygwin wrote:
>
> > The latest version of gdb that is not a test version is 11.2. But
> > you are using 9.2.
>
> I am using the older dumper as well, my working cygwin is not cutting edge.
>
> $ dumper -V
> dumper (cygwin)
> The latest version of gdb that is not a test version is 11.2. But
> you are using 9.2.
I am using the older dumper as well, my working cygwin is not cutting edge.
$ dumper -V
dumper (cygwin) 3.2.0
What I am coming at is that if dumper is not consistent with gdb,
that does not make any sense.
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 23:09:27 +
"Lavrentiev, Anton \(NIH/NLM/NCBI\) \[C\] wrote:
> > Try using a more recent gdb. I just tried your test case with gdb-12.1-1
> > (available as a test release), and it seemed to work.
>
> Thanks for the quick response... Though I'd rather not use test releases.
> Try using a more recent gdb. I just tried your test case with gdb-12.1-1
> (available as a test release), and it seemed to work.
Thanks for the quick response... Though I'd rather not use test releases.
The dumper binary and gdb in my case are supposed to be consistent with each
other
On 7/8/2022 6:06 PM, Lavrentiev, Anton (NIH/NLM/NCBI) [C] via Cygwin wrote:
Hi all,
I need to do some deep debugging on Cygwin so I need to produce a core... And
it does not work.
So I reduced the problem to this minimal test case:
$ cat a.c
#include
int main()
{
abort();
}
$ gcc
8 matches
Mail list logo
