Re: Debugging threaded processes -- ptrace proposal

[Antti Kantee <pooka%cs.hut.fi@localhost>]

You rock!

Were there kernel diffs for NetBSD 5 hanging around somewhere?

On Mon Apr 19 2010 at 15:09:44 -0400, Paul Koning wrote:
> I just submitted the GDB changes in the form of a proposed fix to
> bin/30756.
> 
>       paul
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Thor Lancelot Simon [mailto:tls%panix.com@localhost]
> > Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 4:45 PM
> > To: Paul Koning
> > Cc: tech-kern%NetBSD.org@localhost
> > Subject: Re: Debugging threaded processes -- ptrace proposal
> > 
> > On Mon, Apr 05, 2010 at 04:37:47PM -0400, Paul Koning wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Apr 05, 2010 at 04:02:02PM -0400, Paul Koning wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > It's probably not all that big a job to backport my change to
> GDB
> > > > 6.x.
> > > > > For that matter, anyone else can do that once I contribute the
> > > change
> > > > to
> > > > > the current GDB.
> > > >
> > > > Actually, there's another problem.  If you contribute copyright in
> > > this
> > > > change to FSF, and that's the only way you're going to distribute
> > it,
> > > > it
> > > > will end up available under GPLv3 only and thus unuseful for
> > backport
> > > > to
> > > > the GPLv2 GDB in NetBSD.  :-/
> > >
> > > Oops.  You're right.
> > >
> > > It looks like the backport is pretty straightforward.  I'll take a
> > look
> > > at the current GDB that NetBSD is using.  I could post the diffs
> > along
> > > with the kernel proposal.
> > 
> > That would be fantastic.  I hope you can eventually make that version
> > of
> > the diff available under a license compatible with either GPLv2 or a
> > BSD-style license, just to clear up any ambiguity.
> > 
> > --
> > Thor Lancelot Simon                                
> > tls%rek.tjls.com@localhost
> >   "All of my opinions are consistent, but I cannot present them all
> >    at once."        -Jean-Jacques Rousseau, On The Social Contract