may@husc7.HARVARD.EDU (may) (02/11/88)
I called Manx yesterday, three weeks after they told me that they'd be shipping in three weeks. The nice lady on the other end told me they'd be taking another three weeks..."there's an error in the documentation, and they're fixing it." I'm not holding my breath. Jason (may@husc4.harvard.edu)
haitex@pnet01.cts.com (Wade Bickel) (02/11/88)
Just out of curiousity, does anyone on the net have a working
Beta of the SDB? With no fatal bugs included?
The reason I ask is because I've begun to wonder if the thing
actually exists yet. I think it is still vapor-ware!
I seem to remember M2Amiga claiming they were soon to release a
SDB for there complier, but as far as I know this has not happened yet
either.
Something just kinda smells funny huh?
Wade. :^)
UUCP: {cbosgd, hplabs!hp-sdd, sdcsvax, nosc}!crash!pnet01!haitex
ARPA: crash!pnet01!haitex@nosc.mil
INET: haitex@pnet01.CTS.COMspencer@eris (Randal m. Spencer [RmS]) (02/13/88)
Recently on *comp.sys.amiga* haitex@pnet01.cts.com (Wade Bickel) wrote:
...
... Just out of curiousity, does anyone on the net have a working
...Beta of the SDB?
...
... I seem to remember M2Amiga claiming they were soon to release a
...SDB for there complier, but as far as I know this has not happened yet
...either.
... Wade. :^)
Ok, ok, so who is it that we are all comparing these companies to? Who is
it that comes out with software ahead of schedule and budget? Word Perfect?
Infinity? Commodore?? Ok, so software isn't an exact science. But then
I don't spend much of my life getting things when I want them, so I have
learned patience. I will just wait 'til the next Star Wars comes out,
I won't complain. I will just want until the $40 100 meg hard disk comes
out. I know that it is inevitable. After all, as Spock says:
You may find in time, that having is not as pleasing a things, as wanting.
I mean, Star Trek is a TV series again. See what I mean?
Random :') (aka Randy) [RmS]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Randy Spencer P.O. Box 4542 Berkeley CA 94704 (415)222-7595
spencer@mica.berkeley.edu I N F I N I T Y BBS: (415)222-9416
..ucbvax!mica!spencer s o f t w a r e AAA-WH1M
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-morgan@brambo.UUCP (Morgan W. Jones) (02/19/88)
In article <4036@husc6.harvard.edu> may@husc7.UUCP (may) writes: >I called Manx yesterday, three weeks after they told me that they'd be >shipping in three weeks. The nice lady on the other end told me >they'd be taking another three weeks..."there's an error in the >documentation, and they're fixing it." I'm not holding my breath. For those who may be interested, the above only applies to the upgrade package, not a new sale. Manx 3.6 has been shipping for several weeks now, complete with documentation. I ordered one about a week ago, and it is in the mail. >Jason -- Morgan Jones - Bramalea Software Inc. ...!utgpu!telly \ !brambo!morgan ...!{uunet!mnetor, watmath!utai}!lsuc!ncrcan / "These might not even be my opinions, let alone anyone else's."
papa@pollux.usc.edu (Marco Papa) (02/21/88)
In article <283@brambo.UUCP> morgan@brambo.UUCP (Morgan W. Jones) writes: >In article <4036@husc6.harvard.edu> may@husc7.UUCP (may) writes: >>I called Manx yesterday, three weeks after they told me that they'd be >>shipping in three weeks. The nice lady on the other end told me >For those who may be interested, the above only applies to the upgrade >package, not a new sale. Manx 3.6 has been shipping for several weeks >now, complete with documentation. I ordered one about a week ago, and >it is in the mail. ^^^^^^^^^^^ Boy, you must be new to the software business :-) Maybe you should look up what "it is in the mail" translate to in Webster Dictionary relating to shipping software. As of today, NO COPIES of either MANX 3.6 or SDB have surfaced at dealers, distributors or users. If anybody on the net has received SDB or MANX 3.6 [and I mean you have it in your hands, not "it is in the mail"], please raise your hand. -- Marco
erikj@hi.unm.edu (Erik Johannes) (02/21/88)
I talked to someone yesterday who had ordered Manx C from a mail order place and and recieved version 3.6 a few days ago. However he didn't order the SDB with it. Perhaps SDB is the hold up. I can't see any reason why the updates shouldn't be shipped if new orders are shipped. Perhaps Jim Goodnow could tell us what's going on. -Erik Johannes
grotjok@k9.cs.orst.edu (Kevin Ray Grotjohn) (02/21/88)
I must be one of the lucky ones. I ordered from Manx on Feb 4. Received version 3.6a on Feb 8. I was a new purchaser, they said upgrades would be sent out in a few weeks, didn't get the SDB. It's been my experience that it's in the mail, or in a few weeks means a few months wait. -------------------------------------------------------------------- I go to MOO U, I will not admit that in a signature. Now if somebody were to offer me a real job, I might come up with one. grotjok@k9.cs.orst.edu ( Don't laugh, I had no choice about the login name) --------------------------------------------------------------------
cks@radio.toronto.edu (Chris Siebenmann) (02/22/88)
In article <2522@crash.cts.com> haitex@pnet01.cts.com (Wade Bickel) writes: > > Just out of curiousity, does anyone on the net have a working >Beta of the SDB? With no fatal bugs included? > > The reason I ask is because I've begun to wonder if the thing >actually exists yet. I think it is still vapor-ware! We have a working copy at work (along with 3.6). I'm not certain whether it's a beta or the final release; our president managed to talk Jim Goodnow into sending us a copy after the LA AmiExpo (all we have is a disk with the essential bits of 3.6, sdb, and a demo with some scanty documentation). It works. It's nice, but could be nicer. I haven't found any fatal bugs yet, although I haven't tried to look at floating point numbers with it. Source level debugging is the only way to go, though; you can do so many neat things with SDB (like evaluating arbitrary expressions, including function calls, or printing a structure with all its fields labeled). -- "I shall clasp my hands together and bow to the corners of the world." Number Ten Ox, "Bridge of Birds" Chris Siebenmann {allegra,mnetor,decvax,pyramid}!utgpu!radio!cks cks@radio.toronto.edu or ...!utgpu!{chp!hak!ziebmef,ontmoh}!cks
pat@uxc.cso.uiuc.edu (02/22/88)
I received a call from MANX on Friday informing me that the SDB and 3.6 are shipping. I have the commerical version and they wanted to know if I wanted to buy the SDB. I informed them that I had ordered it back in Nov or Dec and I then asked them to verify the order. I gave him my serial number and he then told me what lot I was in (10) and when (within two weeks) it would ship. Mikel Matthews
morgan@brambo.UUCP (Morgan W. Jones) (02/22/88)
In article <7109@oberon.USC.EDU> papa@pollux.usc.edu (Marco Papa) writes: }In article <283@brambo.UUCP> morgan@brambo.UUCP (Morgan W. Jones) writes: }>now, complete with documentation. I ordered one about a week ago, and }>it is in the mail. } ^^^^^^^^^^^ }Boy, you must be new to the software business :-) Maybe you should look up what }"it is in the mail" translate to in Webster Dictionary relating to shipping }software. } }As of today, NO COPIES of either MANX 3.6 or SDB have surfaced at dealers, }distributors or users. If anybody on the net has received SDB or MANX 3.6 }[and I mean you have it in your hands, not "it is in the mail"], please }raise your hand. First, I'm the one who says that it is in the mail, not Manx. As for no copy of 3.6 surfacing in any dealer, check your facts before you speak. I talked to a friend yesterday who bought a brand new copy of Manx 3.6 from a local dealer, in Toronto Canada! So, to paraphrase another friend, "GET A GRIP!" }-- Marco -- Morgan Jones - Bramalea Software Inc. morgan@brambo.UUCP ...!{uunet!mnetor!lsuc!ncrcan, utgpu!telly}!brambo!morgan "These might not even be my opinions, let alone anyone else's."
ma179aav@sdcc3.ucsd.EDU (Stephen Hartford) (02/23/88)
In article <7109@oberon.USC.EDU> papa@pollux.usc.edu (Marco Papa) writes: > >As of today, NO COPIES of either MANX 3.6 or SDB have surfaced at dealers, >distributors or users. If anybody on the net has received SDB or MANX 3.6 >[and I mean you have it in your hands, not "it is in the mail"], please >raise your hand. > >-- Marco My hand is up. ( actually, it's helping my other hand type right now...) I've had Manx 3.6a ever since Ami Expo, L.A. I don't have SDB though, since most of my work is done in assembly. Not very many differences in 3.6a, besides support for SDB, of course. But it works like a champ. (or is that "chimp" :-). (Join the "If <username> can write funny stuff, so can I" generation today!) -- Stephen Hartford ma179aav@sdcc3%sdcsvax.ucsd.edu CGA? VGA? EGA? A.M.I.G.A.
sis@cord.UUCP (S Schwebel) (02/24/88)
I just received my copy of SDB (and 3.6) last night. It looks very good... well worth the wait. Too soon to tell if its buggy though. We'll see... Steve Schwebel ihnp4!mtunk!sis
obie@eleazar.Dartmouth.EDU (Timothy D. Notestein) (02/24/88)
By the way, I HAVE received the Manx Source Level Debugger. It is truly amazing, and a very useful programming tool. It does what you would expect it to, single-stepping through the program, setting breakpoints, disassembling and viewing memory. By the way, if you are thinking of learning 68000 (10) assembly, the SDB is well worth the $75 purchase price for that feature alone! When it disassembles your running code, it displays the C statement, and then beneath it the Assembly code. It provides a wealth in variety of ways for displaying and keeping track of variables. With on-line help, the cryptic commands yield very "English" or rather, "C"-type output. In displaying structures, the output looks very similar to what you would have in a C program. It also catches gurus! Not an exactly amazing feat, and the SDB does seem to "forget" everything when this happens, but 1) you can avoid the guru, and 2) if you're familiar enough with 68000, you can get a pretty good idea of what's going on. If you don't know 68000 assembly, at least you will know where your program is going haywire. It has a built-in command line history, and you can also scroll up/down your 'output' window. Perhaps I should be calling it the diagnostic window. In any case, it's the window that talks to you. When asking SDB to display a variable this window is where the information will be displayed. There are also a wealth of "hot-keys" which require some initial memorization, but provide for a greater ease of use. What SDB is NOT: SDB is _NOT_ an interpreter. IF you were hoping that SDB provided anything like the AmigaBASIC programming environment, you are wrong. After ever change you make to your program, you will need to recompile and re-link (an aside: you must compile and link with special options). If you alter your source code after having compiled and linked, the SDB will yield unintelligable results. One things that I noticed immediately is that my program source size shrunk by about 50%. I took out all of my kprintf() statements. :-) A few comments on Manx 3.6 : it comes with another whole slew of compiling options. I won't even pretend to understand the purpose of most of them yet. The linker, or rather, actually, the assembler: we now have Amiga-compatible object files! (you have absolutely no idea how happy this makes me) They also kindly included the signal() and raise() statements to catch certain traps that might occur in your program. On signal(), however, I'm confused. Why doesn't it catch SIGINT,SIGTERM, or SIGABRT events? In writing user-friendly software, these are the events that I would be most interested in catching..? :-( As well, Manx claims that in version 3.6, they're (oops, their) code is even smaller and faster. I haven't verified this, but even if I compile a "Hello world.\n" program, I always get a link message that Layers_info structure is incomplete, or some such message. Just a quirk. To summarize: the Manx 3.6 upgrade/Source Level Debugger is WELL worth the $75 price tag. The SDB provides a most user-friendly and powerful debugger that also acts as a monitor/code-view/disassembler/Rom-WACK-type-of-program. And all of this without a 9600-baud terminal tied to yourserial port. (which would do me no good, because I write serial communications programs, and NEED that port.) The value of the 3.6 upgrade alone is more than $75, considering the compatibility that is reinstated in the Amiga world. No longer will the support programmers (a.k.a., people like Microsmiths, providing ARP) need to provide both Manx and Lattice object modules.
spencer@eris (Randal m. Spencer [RmS]) (02/24/88)
Recently on *comp.sys.amiga* pat@uxc.cso.uiuc.edu wrote: ... ...I received a call from MANX on Friday informing me that the SDB and 3.6 are ...shipping. We have seen alot of flack about Manx not shipping the SDB, and by now I am sure that everyone knows that the problem has not been JimG, but actually a problem back in NewJersey (documentation?) Well, I spoke to Jim the other day and it looks like he is in it for the long haul. He told me once that when he finished 4.1 (the next rev after 3.4, 3.6 is just support for SDB) that he would be moving on and doing something else with his life. Seems that the folks back East made him an offer he couldn't refuse. He was really excited to tell me that he is getting to DO the rev 5.0 for Manx. Not like doing rev 4.1, but actually the Amiga version of Manx will be the first to rev to 5.0. Kind of exciting to think that the Amiga has gotten this far this fast. ...Mikel Matthews -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Randy Spencer P.O. Box 4542 Berkeley CA 94704 (415)222-7595 spencer@mica.berkeley.edu I N F I N I T Y BBS: (415)222-9416 ..ucbvax!mica!spencer s o f t w a r e AAA-WH1M -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
ejkst@cisunx.UUCP (Eric J. Kennedy) (02/25/88)
In article <8235@eleazar.Dartmouth.EDU>, obie@eleazar.Dartmouth.EDU (Timothy D. Notestein) writes: > By the way, I HAVE received the Manx Source Level Debugger. > > It is truly amazing, and a very useful programming tool. It does what you would > expect it to, single-stepping through the program, setting breakpoints, > disassembling and viewing memory. By the way, if you are thinking of learning > 68000 (10) assembly, the SDB is well worth the $75 purchase price for that > feature alone! When it disassembles your running code, it displays the C > statement, and then beneath it the Assembly code. Thanks for the good review! One question, just how useful is SDB for someone who _doesn't_ know Assembly, and is not ready to take the plunge and learn it? I know that DB is about useless to me. Is SDB better? Okay, it has to be better if it's a source level debugger, but, really, will I get much out of it if I don't know the first thing about Assembly and don't particularly want to learn (yet) ? -- ------------ Eric Kennedy ejkst@cisunx.UUCP
barrett@ektools.UUCP (Chris Barrett) (02/26/88)
In article <7109@oberon.USC.EDU>, papa@pollux.usc.edu (Marco Papa) writes: > > As of today, NO COPIES of either MANX 3.6 or SDB have surfaced at dealers, > distributors or users. If anybody on the net has received SDB or MANX 3.6 > [and I mean you have it in your hands, not "it is in the mail"], please > raise your hand. > > -- Marco I have had Manx 3.6 and SDB since 2/19/88. Bith work great. They arived via UPS. The SDB manual was a preliminary version with the offical version available before 4/1/88 (according to the note on the preliminary manual). SDB is easy to use and quite powerful. The only limitation that I have found is that you can't use a variables modification as a break point. I've been using VAX's too long. Hope this sheads some light. Chris.
obie@eleazar.Dartmouth.EDU (Timothy D. Notestein) (02/27/88)
In article <7204@cisunx.UUCP> ejkst@cisunx.UUCP (Eric J. Kennedy) writes: > >Thanks for the good review! One question, just how useful is SDB for >someone who _doesn't_ know Assembly, and is not ready to take the plunge For someone that doesn't know Assembly, the SDB still completely fits the bill as an extremely powerful debugger. Heck, I _don't_ know 68000 assembly, although I hope to learn soon, and it would appear that SDB is the _best_ learning tool that I have for Assembly! Since I'm not that familiar with assembly, I'm not sure how a seasoned assembly programmer would view the SDB, but for the regular C junkie? Great! :-) >and learn it? I know that DB is about useless to me. Is SDB better? >Okay, it has to be better if it's a source level debugger, but, really, >will I get much out of it if I don't know the first thing about Assembly >and don't particularly want to learn (yet) ? > > >-- >------------ >Eric Kennedy >ejkst@cisunx.UUCP Without doubt. It would be difficult to use without a competant grasp of the C language, and it helps to be familiar with the concepts involved, like how pointers work, etc, as, without THAT knowledge, which is covered in any complete C book, it would be difficult to intelligently use the debugger. =============================================================================== Dartmouth? Did I say that? I didn't mean it. -Tim ===============================================================================
morgan@brambo.UUCP (Morgan W. Jones) (02/29/88)
I now have Manx 3.6 in my hands, having ordered it from Manx and had
it sent through the mail.
--
Morgan Jones - Bramalea Software Inc. morgan@brambo.UUCP
...!{uunet!mnetor!lsuc!ncrcan, utgpu!telly}!brambo!morgan
"These might not even be my opinions, let alone anyone else's."DMasterson@cup.portal.com (02/29/88)
In message (7204@cisunx.UUCP) ejkst@cisunx.UUCP (Eric J Kennedy) writes: >In article <8235@eleazar.Dartmouth.EDU>, obie@eleazar.Dartmouth.EDU writes: >> By the way, I HAVE received the Manx Source Level Debugger. >> >> It is truly amazing, and a very useful programming tool. It does what you >>would >> expect it to, single-stepping through the program, setting breakpoints, >> disassembling and viewing memory. By the way, if you are thinking of >>learning >> 68000 (10) assembly, the SDB is well worth the $75 purchase price for that >> feature alone! When it disassembles your running code, it displays the C >> statement, and then beneath it the Assembly code. > >Thanks for the good review! One question, just how useful is SDB for >someone who _doesn't_ know Assembly, and is not ready to take the plunge >and learn it? I know that DB is about useless to me. Is SDB better? >Okay, it has to be better if it's a source level debugger, but, really, >will I get much out of it if I don't know the first thing about Assembly >and don't particularly want to learn (yet) ? > It seems quite good to me. The ability to step through source in its own window makes debugging C programs quite fun. The only problem I have right now is trying to debug what's going wrong within one of the provided C functions (fgets()) when it tries to AllocMem. I had to revert to assembly to figure that much out. The problem (I think) is that the debug files for the libraries are not provided. >------------ >Eric Kennedy >ejkst@cisunx.UUCP
haitex@pnet01.cts.com (Wade Bickel) (03/01/88)
ejkst@cisunx.UUCP (Eric J. Kennedy) writes: >Thanks for the good review! One question, just how useful is SDB for >someone who _doesn't_ know Assembly, and is not ready to take the plunge >and learn it? I know that DB is about useless to me. Is SDB better? >Okay, it has to be better if it's a source level debugger, but, really, >will I get much out of it if I don't know the first thing about Assembly >and don't particularly want to learn (yet) ? I have not seen SDB yet, but the value of such a program can be tremendous. Suppose you have mis-indexed an array, with SDB you would be able to examine the index values and notice its mis-alignment. If your a MANX programmer you shouldn't think twice about buying it. For $75 it should pay for itself in a month or two even if you are only worth minimum wage (assuming you spend much time programming, that is). Also, if you are a serious programmer you must learn assembly language. It is not much more difficult than C, and provides an essential understanding of how the computer works. Learning assembly languages (the pricipals) will benifit programming in other languages as well. It's really worth it in the long run. Good Luck, Wade. UUCP: {cbosgd, hplabs!hp-sdd, sdcsvax, nosc}!crash!pnet01!haitex ARPA: crash!pnet01!haitex@nosc.mil INET: haitex@pnet01.CTS.COM
phils@tekigm2.TEK.COM (Philip E Staub) (03/03/88)
In article <7109@oberon.USC.EDU> papa@pollux.usc.edu (Marco Papa) writes: >As of today, NO COPIES of either MANX 3.6 or SDB have surfaced at dealers, >distributors or users. If anybody on the net has received SDB or MANX 3.6 ^^^^^ Wrong. >[and I mean you have it in your hands, not "it is in the mail"], please >raise your hand. > >-- Marco Hand raised. I ordered mine sometime in November. Mostly because I've been waiting a year and a half for something like SDB on the Amiga. I received it in the mail on 2/26. I haven't had much time to play with it yet, but so far I'm fairly impressed, with one exception and one minor nit to pick. Exception: I haven't figured out how (or if its possible) to continuously monitor register and/or variable contents while stepping thorough a program short of issuing a command following each step. Nit: There should be a way to single step with a single keystroke instead of s <return> or t <return>. A macro, maybe? Haven't played with macros yet so I don't know. Anyway, just thought you should know to hang in there. -Phil -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Phil Staub "I do NOT approve. I merely said I UNDERSTAND." tektronix!tekigm2!phils - Spock phils@tekigm2.TEK.COM
papa@pollux.usc.edu (Marco Papa) (03/03/88)
In article <2601@tekigm2.TEK.COM> phils@tekigm2.UUCP (Philip E Staub) writes: >In article <7109@oberon.USC.EDU> papa@pollux.usc.edu (Marco Papa) writes: >>As of today, NO COPIES of either MANX 3.6 or SDB have surfaced at dealers, >>distributors or users. If anybody on the net has received SDB or MANX 3.6 > ^^^^^ >Wrong. >Hand raised. I ordered mine sometime in November. Mostly because I've been >waiting a year and a half for something like SDB on the Amiga. I received it >in the mail on 2/26. I haven't had much time to play with it yet, but so far >I'm fairly impressed, with one exception and one minor nit to pick. I got my copy 3 days ago. From the preliminary docs it looks good. I am glad the library sources were included with 3.6a at no c|GDharge (for commercial licensees). That shows committment. We were fairly high on the list for SDB. They (MANX) seem to be short on disks: they required us to send the original disks back to continue to receive updates. With the current shortage and pricing of 3 1/2 in. disks, that's understandable. -- Marco
conn@stratus.UUCP (Avery Shealey) (03/03/88)
Has anyone else had this occur? I was compiling a very simple program
to rename some files for me. I was using the builtin string functions.
I compiled with the -n option to use the debugger. The compiler
gave me no problems. But, the assembler died on the code from the compiler.
It happened twice, once on some other program. I have not been able
to reproduce it again, even with the program it died on before.
Anyone else seen it?
Avery
Avery Shealey
School of Information & Computer Science, Georgia Tech, Atlanta GA 30332
Internet: conn@stratus.gatech.edu CSNet: conn%stratus@gatech
UUCP: ...!{akgua,allegra,amd,hplabs,seismo,ihnp4}!gatech!stratus!connmanx@well.UUCP (Jim Goodnow II) (03/05/88)
In article <2601@tekigm2.TEK.COM> phils@tekigm2.UUCP (Philip E Staub) writes: > .... I haven't had much time to play with it yet, but so far >I'm fairly impressed, with one exception and one minor nit to pick. > >Exception: >I haven't figured out how (or if its possible) to continuously monitor >register and/or variable contents while stepping thorough a program short of >issuing a command following each step. > >Nit: >There should be a way to single step with a single keystroke instead of >s <return> or t <return>. A macro, maybe? Haven't played with macros yet so >I don't know. > >Anyway, just thought you should know to hang in there. > >-Phil Just thought people might like to know the history and plans for SDB. It was originally written for our IBM-PC 8086 compiler and designed to run strictly with a glass teletype user interface. After the initial version was released, it was deemed too big and buggy and was mostly rewritten. It was this newer version which I ported to the 68000, in particular the Amiga. In order to make the product available ASAP, I restricted myself to only modifying the interface by adding source and data windows. In all other respects it is still the same program which runs on the PC. To see what that is like, just try invoking it with "-w". From a user interface standpoint, I tend not to use the mouse very much in my normal development. However, I've decided that being able to debug using only the mouse is extremely powerful and future versions of SDB will not support the "-w" option and will have a lot more features. I suspect that the reason I haven't been deluged with enhancement requests is that even as is, SDB is very powerful and that we STILL haven't got caught up with shipping the back orders. As it is, MY enhancement list is very long but any requests sent to "well!manx" will certainly be considered. jim goodnow II Manx Software Systems USENET: well!manx BIX: jgoodnow PS: The only serious problems that have been reported thus far are: 1) .mac files aren't being saved though they will be read if present. 2) All floating point numbers are assumed to be IEEE not FFP. 3) 68881 registers are not displayed. 4) Register variables in previous stack frames are not handled correctly if there are non-register local variables in the frame.
jea@ur-cvsvax.UUCP (Joanne Albano) (03/07/88)
Am I correct in assuming that SBD will only work with Manx compiled programs? -- =================================================================== Joanne Albano, Center for Visual Science (716) 275-6848 Room 256 Meliora Hall, Univ. of Rochester, Rochester NY 14627 UUCP: ur-cvsvax!jea@rochester.EDU ARPANET: UR-CVSVAX!JEA@ROCHESTER.ARPA
jack@cca.CCA.COM (Jack Orenstein) (03/07/88)
In article <721@ur-cvsvax.UUCP> jea@ur-cvsvax.UUCP (Joanne Albano) writes: > >Am I correct in assuming that SBD will only work with Manx >compiled programs? Programs must be compiled and linked with Manx 3.6 software, and the correct flags must be used (-n for the compiler, -g for the linker). Based on one weekend's experience, it seems that .o files expand by about 50% as a result. (It's worth it!) Code not compiled with the -n flag can be linked in, but cannot be examined with the debugger, (I haven't tried this combination yet). Jack Orenstein This is not a disclaimer.
papa@pollux.usc.edu (Marco Papa) (03/08/88)
In article <721@ur-cvsvax.UUCP> jea@ur-cvsvax.UUCP (Joanne Albano) writes: > >Am I correct in assuming that SBD will only work with Manx >compiled programs? YES! And it will only work with versions >=3.60a of MANX C. -- Marco
jay@garfield.UUCP (Jay Kumarasingam) (03/10/88)
======CRUNCH==========
I placed an order for the Aztec C 3.6 professional and the Symbolic Debugger
SDB on February 19 and received it yesterday March 8th. Which is pretty good.
Documentation for the SDB is still the photocopied temp ones.
SDB only works with filed compiled under 3.6 Aztec C
Jay
J.(Jay) Kumarasingam
UUCP: {akgua,allegra,cbosgd,ihnp4,utcsri}!garfield!jay
EAN: jay@garfield.mun.cdn
CSNET: jay%garfield.mun.cdn@ubc.csnet