>>>>> "Tero" == Tero Manninen <tero.manninen@oulu.fi> writes:

Tero> Hi, Since nobody seems to care about debugger in 1.0 I have
Tero> planned to make a small 1.0 installation (I won't leave 0.9a,
Tero> yet!!!) to see what the heck is it with the ptrace(2).  Any
Tero> information regarding the problem is welcome.

I don't know 'bout 1.0 (as I'm current) so I haven't answered your
aearlier queries about ptrace in 1.0.  In current ptrace definitely
works, and it was my impression that 1.0 wouldn't be released before
that specific problem were solved.  If so, gdb will work in 1.0, and
you can safely switch.  It's strange that noone else has bothered with
Tero's question concerning the debugger.  Come on, tell us,
non-1.0ers, are gdb working or not?

Tero> Now, I have a problem. Since I don't have a working 1.0
Tero> environment, can I run binaries compiled under 0.9 in 1.0?  I
Tero> see there a "COMPAT_09" flag in the configuration file.  Does
Tero> this it? If not, what else should I do? Do statically linked 0.9
Tero> programs work, or shoud I link dynamic?

Yes, COMPAT_09 should be enough.  Both static and dynamic progs should
work, but see to keep old versions of the shared libraries.

Tero> Then another thing.. is there any tool to analyze kernel dumps
Tero> in /var/crash? I got my first 0.9a panic some time ago:

Not really.  In 1.0 you cannot even get the dumps anymore :-(

Niklas