gdb Issues With Dev-3.3 under OpenSTEP 4.2

Started by bkmoore, March 13, 2009, 06:47:01 am

Previous topic - Next topic

bkmoore

I set up my OS4.2 system with the dual 4.2/3.3 development environment per kb7sqi's instructions and scripts.

It seems to work ok with the exception of using gdb when Dev-3.3 is the active developer.  I can use gdb from the command line.  But when I try to launch gdb from the ProjectBuilder, It seems to hang while reading symbols.

All I get to under the gdb console is:

Reading symbols from /usr/shlib/...  done.
Reading symbols from /usr/shlib/...  done.
Reading symbols from /usr/shlib/...  done.

then hang.

I was wondering if anyone else has had this issue and what the fix is.

Brian Moore

kb7sqi

Quote from: "bkmoore"I set up my OS4.2 system with the dual 4.2/3.3 development environment per kb7sqi's instructions and scripts.

It seems to work ok with the exception of using gdb when Dev-3.3 is the active developer.  I can use gdb from the command line.  But when I try to launch gdb from the ProjectBuilder, It seems to hang while reading symbols.

All I get to under the gdb console is:

Reading symbols from /usr/shlib/...  done.
Reading symbols from /usr/shlib/...  done.
Reading symbols from /usr/shlib/...  done.

then hang.

I was wondering if anyone else has had this issue and what the fix is.

Brian Moore


Hi Brian,
   You explained the problem/solution all in one post. ;-)  The dual-development system does work for most things 99% of the time, but it also causes some problems.  Just an example, telnet/ssh to your box, make sure you have dev or develop pointing to the 4.2 version.  Login vi the console using keyboard/mouse.  Then open up a terminal window.  Change the dev environment to the 3.3 version.  Then try to use something from the services menu.  You'll notice some things won't work, like OpenSesame. The reason is when running the script, it shifts the entire /NextDeveloper to either 3.3/4.2 along w/ stuff for the command line, libraries, etc required for dev work.  It's not a perfect solution.  I'll admit, when compiling, I do it all vi an ssh session.  If you look at the dev-setup script, I'm sure you'll see there's room for improvement.  Like leaving the "Demos" folder alone.  Hope that makes enough sense for ya.  Take care.

bkmoore

kb7sqi,

Thanks for the response.  There's always 10 ways to accomplish any task in UNIX / NeXTSTEP.  That's what I love about these systems.  I was just hoping someone had the perfect, elegant, kludge-free solution.

I'll get right to work on my own personal work around... or just use yours.

Thanks,

Brian Moore

kb7sqi

Quote from: "bkmoore"kb7sqi,

Thanks for the response.  There's always 10 ways to accomplish any task in UNIX / NeXTSTEP.  That's what I love about these systems.  I was just hoping someone had the perfect, elegant, kludge-free solution.

I'll get right to work on my own personal work around... or just use yours.

Thanks,

Brian Moore


Hi Brian,
   I'll look @ the setup script & see if it'd be easy to leave the Demo's folder alone.  The other solution possible which a lot of people back in the day did was if they were "only" going to develop NEXTSTEP software & no OPENSTEP software was to simply remove all the OPENSTEP developer packages & install the NEXTSTEP 3.3 Developer packages + patches.  You get the benefit of running OPENSTEP plus the NEXTSTEP 3.3 Dev environment.   But this can limit you also.  It really comes down to how you want to develop software on the systems.  I like having the choice. :-)  Take care.

bkmoore

kb7sqi,

Thanks for all the good advice.  My development experience is with NS3.3 and with Cocoa.  So for me I will give OS 4.2 with Dev 3.3 a shot under Parallels in a separate VM.  The beauty with virtual machines is I can create all the versions I want to try out.

The main reason I wanted to run Dev 3.3 is to compile x86 versions of some of the things I did on my NeXT Station, running NS 3.3.

As for the OpenSTEP API, it seems a lot like Cocoa without the Quartz drawing kit or any of the core frameworks.  I haven't really played with it much, but I was able to compile some trivial Cocoa stuff on it without too many difficulties.  It was kind of entertaining to port a basic Mac OS X app backwards to NeXT.

Take care, and nice web page.

Brian Moore