Bug#422007: gdb: Easy way to reproduce the internal error #422007

2007-10-23 Thread Marcus Better
Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: Well, I'm stuck. I need some more information or a way to reproduce the error :-( I just succeeded to get the X stack trace that I was after in the first place. So this bug appears to have gone into hiding for the moment. Marcus -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to

Bug#422007: gdb: Easy way to reproduce the internal error #422007

2007-10-22 Thread Marcus Better
Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: Well, I'm stuck. I need some more information or a way to reproduce the error :-( What do you make of the log output that I got? After I press continue in gdb, I get the alarm messages about twice per second, and if I switch into the X console it just locks up the

Bug#422007: gdb: Easy way to reproduce the internal error #422007

2007-10-22 Thread Daniel Jacobowitz
On Mon, Oct 22, 2007 at 09:04:30AM +0200, Marcus Better wrote: Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: Well, I'm stuck. I need some more information or a way to reproduce the error :-( What do you make of the log output that I got? After I press continue in gdb, I get the alarm messages about twice per

Bug#422007: gdb: Easy way to reproduce the internal error #422007

2007-10-22 Thread Marcus Better
Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: Are you running GDB from a console on the same machine as X? Yes. Marcus

Bug#422007: gdb: Easy way to reproduce the internal error #422007

2007-10-19 Thread Daniel Jacobowitz
On Fri, Oct 19, 2007 at 09:10:49AM +0200, Marcus Better wrote: Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: Sorry, I should have known better. Could you try that once more but with just strace, no -f argument? Here it is, I still don't see the error though. Well, I'm stuck. I need some more information or

Bug#422007: gdb: Easy way to reproduce the internal error #422007

2007-10-18 Thread Daniel Jacobowitz
On Thu, Oct 18, 2007 at 10:47:08AM +0200, Marcus Better wrote: Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: I don't have any configuration where I could try this. Since you do and can reproduce it, could you run some tests for me? Sure. But I'm not sure if I succeeded in reproducing it this time. Sorry, I

Bug#422007: gdb: Easy way to reproduce the internal error #422007

2007-10-17 Thread Daniel Jacobowitz
On Mon, Oct 01, 2007 at 10:21:45PM +0400, Samium Gromoff wrote: In one shell run `sleep 1000`, and then suspend it with C-z: This is a known problem with GDB; when you attach to stopped processes it gets confused. The kernel does not offer any reliably useful interfaces to fix this problem, but

Bug#422007: gdb: Easy way to reproduce the internal error #422007

2007-10-17 Thread Marcus Better
Daniel Jacobowitz skrev: I can't reproduce it attaching to an X process on my amd64 system. Could someone who can please give me more details baout your configuration? Maybe only one graphics driver provokes this? Mine is radeon. I have xserver-xorg-video-intel. See #443794 for configuration

Bug#422007: gdb: Easy way to reproduce the internal error #422007

2007-10-17 Thread Daniel Jacobowitz
On Wed, Oct 17, 2007 at 08:57:28PM +0200, Marcus Better wrote: Daniel Jacobowitz skrev: I can't reproduce it attaching to an X process on my amd64 system. Could someone who can please give me more details baout your configuration? Maybe only one graphics driver provokes this? Mine is

Bug#422007: gdb: Easy way to reproduce the internal error #422007

2007-10-01 Thread Samium Gromoff
Package: gdb Version: 6.6.dfsg.90.20070912-1 Followup-For: Bug #422007 In one shell run `sleep 1000`, and then suspend it with C-z: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ sleep 1000 [1]+ Stopped sleep 1000 In another shell, run gdb --pid=`pidof sleep` (provided there's no other sleeps running in