[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: gdb 5.1 dumped core on me [was: Emacs abort under gdb]
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
Re: gdb 5.1 dumped core on me [was: Emacs abort under gdb] |
Date: |
Thu, 24 Jan 2002 09:40:05 +0200 (IST) |
> From: Francesco Potorti` <address@hidden>
> Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 12:27:11 +0100
>
> (gdb) p/x current_buffer->auto_save_file_name
> $59 = 0x1827b31c
> (gdb) xstring
> $60 = (struct Lisp_String *) 0x827b31c
> Segmentation fault (core dumped)
Does GDB's core file say something interesting about where did GDB
crash?
Anyway, since no one responded, let me rephrase the (implicit)
question in Francesco's report: Is GDB supposed to handle invalid
memory accesses gracefully? That is, if the user asks GDB to access
the inferior's memory via an invalid pointer, does GDB protect itself
against SIGSEGV and other related calamities?
- gdb 5.1 dumped core on me [was: Emacs abort under gdb], Francesco Potorti`, 2002/01/22
- Re: gdb 5.1 dumped core on me [was: Emacs abort under gdb], Richard Stallman, 2002/01/22
- Re: gdb 5.1 dumped core on me [was: Emacs abort under gdb],
Eli Zaretskii <=
- Re: gdb 5.1 dumped core on me [was: Emacs abort under gdb], Andrew Cagney, 2002/01/24
- Re: gdb 5.1 dumped core on me [was: Emacs abort under gdb], Francesco Potorti`, 2002/01/26
- Re: Bug#131033: gdb 5.1 dumped core on me [was: Emacs abort under gdb], Daniel Jacobowitz, 2002/01/26
- Re: gdb 5.1 dumped core on me [was: Emacs abort under gdb], Eli Zaretskii, 2002/01/27
- Re: gdb 5.1 dumped core on me [was: Emacs abort under gdb], Francesco Potorti`, 2002/01/27
- Re: Bug#131033: gdb 5.1 dumped core on me [was: Emacs abort under gdb], Daniel Jacobowitz, 2002/01/27
- Re: Bug#131033: gdb 5.1 dumped core on me [was: Emacs abort under gdb], Francesco Potorti`, 2002/01/28
- Re: Bug#131033: gdb 5.1 dumped core on me [was: Emacs abort under gdb], Eli Zaretskii, 2002/01/28
Re: gdb 5.1 dumped core on me [was: Emacs abort under gdb], Michael Snyder, 2002/01/25