Re: Debugging ports

Well, 11-STABLE now has LLVM 5.0 too, so it should work as well as in head. I actually tried it on the recent 11-STABLE. On 17-10-18 10:03:49, Guido Falsi wrote: On 10/18/2017 09:59, Piotr Kubaj wrote: According to https://wiki.freebsd.org/lldb, it should work just fine on amd64, apart from

Re: Debugging ports

On 10/18/2017 09:59, Piotr Kubaj wrote: > According to https://wiki.freebsd.org/lldb, it should work just fine on > amd64, apart from kernel debugger. I suppose there should be some > improvements for other archs too, since that page was updated 1.5 years > ago :) Great! And good to know, I'll

Re: Debugging ports

According to https://wiki.freebsd.org/lldb, it should work just fine on amd64, apart from kernel debugger. I suppose there should be some improvements for other archs too, since that page was updated 1.5 years ago :) On 17-10-18 09:54:05, Guido Falsi wrote: On 10/18/2017 09:52, Piotr Kubaj

Re: Debugging ports

On 10/18/2017 09:52, Piotr Kubaj wrote: > Shouldn't lldb be the replacement for gdb in base? I'm not keeping an eye on that, but I don't think it's ready at present. -- Guido Falsi ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list

Re: Debugging ports

Shouldn't lldb be the replacement for gdb in base? On 17-10-18 09:47:25, Guido Falsi wrote: On 10/18/2017 06:33, Jan Beich wrote: Kubilay Kocak writes: On 10/18/17 8:29 AM, Jan Beich wrote: Guido Falsi writes: On 10/17/2017 23:11, Guido Falsi

Re: Debugging ports

On 10/18/2017 06:33, Jan Beich wrote: > Kubilay Kocak writes: > >> On 10/18/17 8:29 AM, Jan Beich wrote: >> >>> Guido Falsi writes: >>> On 10/17/2017 23:11, Guido Falsi wrote: >> >> Thing is, recompiling with WITH_DEBUG doesn't help (I

Re: Debugging ports

Kubilay Kocak writes: > On 10/18/17 8:29 AM, Jan Beich wrote: > >> Guido Falsi writes: >> >>> On 10/17/2017 23:11, Guido Falsi wrote: >>> > > Thing is, recompiling with WITH_DEBUG doesn't help (I only get > memory addresses in gdb), nor does

Re: Debugging ports

On 10/18/17 8:29 AM, Jan Beich wrote: > Guido Falsi writes: > >> On 10/17/2017 23:11, Guido Falsi wrote: >> Thing is, recompiling with WITH_DEBUG doesn't help (I only get memory addresses in gdb), nor does -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Debug to CMAKE_ARGS (the port

Re: Debugging ports

I think I got it. It turns out that it's our gdb in base that can't read the debug info. lldb and gdb from ports do it just fine. I also thought about recompiling library dependecies, but something didn't fit in, because not only the libraries calls were not there, but the calls from the port

Re: Debugging ports

Guido Falsi writes: > On 10/17/2017 23:11, Guido Falsi wrote: > >>> >>> Thing is, recompiling with WITH_DEBUG doesn't help (I only get >>> memory addresses in gdb), nor does -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Debug to >>> CMAKE_ARGS (the port uses CMake). > > Sorry, I clearly did not parse

Re: Debugging ports

On 10/17/2017 23:11, Guido Falsi wrote: Thing is, recompiling with WITH_DEBUG doesn't help (I only get memory addresses in gdb), nor does -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Debug to CMAKE_ARGS (the port uses CMake). Sorry, I clearly did not parse your message correctly. Looks strange though, WITH_DEBUG

Re: Debugging ports

Piotr Kubaj via freebsd-ports writes: > Hi all, > > I am preparing a new port. However, I hit an assertion fail when > starting the binary. The developer is willing to help me, provided > that I send him backtrace and values from the structure that hits > assertion

Re: Debugging ports

On 10/17/2017 18:04, Piotr Kubaj via freebsd-ports wrote: Hi all, I am preparing a new port. However, I hit an assertion fail when starting the binary. The developer is willing to help me, provided that I send him backtrace and values from the structure that hits assertion failure. Thing