Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!apple!well!keithd
From: keithd@well.sf.ca.us (Keith Doyle)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.tech
Subject: Re: Manx SDB bug (second try)
Message-ID: <16579@well.sf.ca.us>
Date: 9 Mar 90 10:36:14 GMT
References: <16480@well.sf.ca.us> <34700001@suna8>
Reply-To: keithd@well.UUCP (Keith Doyle)
Organization: Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link, Sausalito, CA
Lines: 18

In article <34700001@suna8> martin@suna8.cs.uiuc.edu writes:
>     I tried your program on my machine (2000HD, 1Meg, 1Meg-Fat Agnus),
>   and sdb performed just as you described.  Quite strange!  
>
>     Please post any information you get from MANX about this problem!  I
>   was upset enough that the upgrade didn't include a window to dynamically
>   observe variables like I have at work on IBM's running Turbo-C or 
>   Zortech-C++!  Now it appears that sdb needs further debugging itself!

Thanks for trying it out and confirming the bug (thanks to the rest of the
gang who did as well).  I haven't heard from Manx yet, I feel better now
about giving them another call now that I know it is repeatable.  This bug
does seem serious enough to render SDB's use dicey at best, though I
have been able to use it ok by avoiding doing a 't' command over 
strcpy(), strcat(), etc.  I'll let you know if I find out any more.

Keith
well!keithd