On Fri, Nov 10, 2006 at 08:01:54PM +0100, Marcel Kilgus wrote:
> Or do you mean that qemu should always and in all situations report an
> adjusted EIP to GDB and re-adjust all EIPs it gets? Interesting idea,
> but I guess that too would lead to dozens of other problems.
Yes precisely. I doubt it
Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> I'd recommend the even simpler hack of having qemu report a PC that
> included the segment base :-)
Probably sounds easier than it is, as seen the serial protocol doesn't
include the PC when a breakpoint fires. qemu would have to
intentionally report a wrong EIP the next
Jonathan Kalbfeld wrote:
> Someone wrote a newer Solaris package for QEMU? I couldn't find it at
> OpenSolaris.org. I want to use it instead of the one I built.
>
> jonathan
>
http://www.google.com/search?hl=de&q=opensolaris+qemu&btnG=Google-Suche&meta=
--martin
Someone wrote a newer Solaris package for QEMU? I couldn't find it at
OpenSolaris.org. I want to use it instead of the one I built.
jonathan
--
--
Jonathan Kalbfeld
+1 323 620 6682
___
Qemu-devel mailing list
Qemu-devel@nongnu.org
http://lists.nong
On Fri, Nov 10, 2006 at 03:56:01PM +, Paul Brook wrote:
> > Assuming that breakpoint locations are indeed meant to be virtual
> > addresses, GDB would have to evaluate the CS descriptor, add the CS
> > base to the EIP address and THEN check whether it knows the address.
> > But as it seems to b
Paul Brook wrote:
> As Dan said, gdb knows nothing about x86 segmentation. As soon as you have
> nonzero segment bases you're pretty much on your own.
I was just wondering, because I didn't invent that "move the code to
3GB base" but it is (was?) the model used by Linux, at least in very
early ver
> Assuming that breakpoint locations are indeed meant to be virtual
> addresses, GDB would have to evaluate the CS descriptor, add the CS
> base to the EIP address and THEN check whether it knows the address.
> But as it seems to be segment-agnostic it doesn't do that and things
> break as a result
Hello,
is it possible to exchange information between two processes, the first
one running inside Qemu on the top of on operating system and the other
one running outside Qemu, except using the network? I know that in
normal case this would be an undesired feature, but is there a way?
If there is
andrzej zaborowski wrote:
>> Well, that explains it then, I guess. In that case I don't really see
>> a clean solution for it.
> If I understand the problem, the clean solution is having the
> debugging symbols at the right addresses: in code that runs with
> paging enabled symbols should be at the
Hello,
I did built the 64-bit binaries on Solaris 10 with the OpenSolaris (Nevada)
/usr/sfw/bin/gcc-stuff.
However, I did not use the gcc binaries from nevada but pulled the (heavily
modified) sources
out of the GNU's GCC CVS (csl-sol210-3_4-branch) and bootstrapped gcc-3.4.3 by
myself.
That wo
On 08/11/06, Marcel Kilgus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Correct. It doesn't know anything at all about i386 segmentation.
Well, that explains it then, I guess. In that case I don't really see
a clean solution for it.
If I understand the problem, the clean solution is having the
debugging symb
11 matches
Mail list logo
