WebSite Information > Article Discussions

Writing bug reports

<< < (3/3)

Lewis Rosenthal:
Hi, Ian...

I surely didn't mean to imply that you were inhospitable!  :P

I'll remember to point to the index file from now on.

Cheers, buddy, and BTW, long-overdue thanks for mentioning Arca Noae on your homepage.

Dave Yeo:

--- Quote from: Barbara on July 25, 2016, 06:40:29 am ---
--- Quote from: Martin Iturbide on July 11, 2016, 09:26:21 pm ---About bww Bitwise article: Writing bug reports

--- End quote ---
...
Developers which use gcc/klibc use this toolkit too, since OS/2 gcc still has not a valid debugger and if you see symbol files (.sym/.xqs) or debug (.dbg) ones inside a package, be quite that this package use Exceptq!
Regards

--- End quote ---

The IBM debuggers work fine with gcc/klibc as long as the appropriate flags are used. Unluckily most of the debuggers aren't freely available. For a free one there is the old IBM Source Debugger, http://hobbes.nmsu.edu/download/pub/os2/dev/util/sd386v50.zip.

Barbara:

The IBM debuggers work fine with gcc/klibc as long as the appropriate flags are used. Unluckily most of the debuggers aren't freely available.
[/quote]
Indeed I was referring only to the gcc/klibc compiler, which is what the community has decided to adopt including other open-source tools (read WATCOM for linker and sure the WATCOM itself), compiler which also lacks other components, such as the GO compiler, for example, not only the debugger. Other hybrid solutions we do not concern, especially if based on proprietary software: it is absolutely normal that 99% of users of this forum privately use all possible available solutions to develop their own programs/software they need, most of them has know-how, unfortunately, not always this software is suitable for release, due to this hybrid.
Here's what I mean when I say that the system, for the moment, is intended to proceed for an amateur way.
Under this concepts, Martin's Open-source campaign is totally right.
We are going forward using only open-source tools, a great thing, and for now, Exceptq is right.
Regards.

Barbara:


--- Quote from: Dave Yeo on July 26, 2016, 04:26:06 am ---The IBM debuggers work fine with gcc/klibc as long as the appropriate flags are used. Unluckily most of the debuggers aren't freely available.

--- End quote ---
Indeed I was referring only to the gcc/klibc compiler, which is what the community has decided to adopt including other open-source tools (read WATCOM for linker and sure the WATCOM itself), compiler which also lacks other components, such as the GO compiler, for example. Other hybrid solutions we do not concern, especially if based on proprietary software, outdated and not available to all: it is absolutely normal that 99% of users of this forum privately use all possible available solutions to develop their own programs/software they need, most of them has know-how, unfortunately, not always this software is suitable for release, as you said, due to this hybrid and not compatible licenses used to achieve the targets,  we need to be as clare as possible talking about developing, saying how really things are.
Here's what I mean when I say that the system, for the moment, is intended to proceed for an amateur way.
Under this concepts, Martin's Open-source campaign is totally right.
We are going forward using only open-source tools, a great thing, and for now, Exceptq is right.
Regards

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page

Go to full version