Re: ddd's segfaulting tradition
"Noah L. Meyerhans" <frodo@ccs.neu.edu> writes:
| On Tue, 20 Apr 1999, E.L. Meijer (Eric) wrote:
| > I wonder, does anyone use ddd in a serious way with C++? Everytime a
| > new debian release arrives I give it a try, and everytime it manages to
| > segfault within a few minutes. I suppose ddd should be nice for C++ if
| > it worked, but I never found one real life bug with it in _my_ code
| > before I hit one in ddd itself.
|
| I've used DDD quite a bit, and I've never had a single crash. I suspect
| your problems have more to do with Lesstif than with DDD. I compiled DDD
| myself and linked it against OSF/Motif (I got it for free from my former
| employer, a Motif re-seller). If you really need DDD that bad (it is a
| great debugger), consider purchasing a Motif license and building your own
| copy.
[large sig deleted]
If the problem is in fact Lesstiff why bother purchasing Motif? Just
download the version that's statically linked against Motif. Certainly
the executable is larger, but other than increasing the amount of load
time and a larger memory footprint it would solve a Lesstif problem,
and it's a lot cheaper than US$100.
Last time I looked there was even a Debian package for a statically
linked copy. But if not you can always go directly to the source,
http://www.cs.tu-bs.de/softech/ddd. If you do this I'd recommend the
semi-static binary. It only links in Motif statically, and everything
else dynamically.
Gary
Reply to: