ultrix 4.0 dbx

[Chris Siebenmann]

brian at dgsi.UUCP (Brian Kelley) writes:
...
| I agree.  The new dbx is a pain. 

 Hell, the old dbx was too. Hasn't DEC noticed yet that "help" in dbx
fails silently (gee, what great help you have there), for example? I
also remember finding some other commands or switches mentioned in the
manpage that didn't work, but I've been avoiding dbx in favor of
printf for the past while. One of these days I'll have to get the most
recent gdb and see if it works; at least I'll have full help and an
organization that listens to bug reports sent in via email.

 In general, DEC seems to grab the MIPS compiler tools, slap them
around until they compile and seem to work on Ultrix, and ship the
result. I find pixie a bad substitute for gproff, for example, not to
mention the fact that it corrupts my programs every now and then,
introducing bugs which cause the pixified version to crash when the
unpixified one doesn't (a wonderfull boost to my confidence in the
numbers it produces, let me tell you).

 Have I reported these as SPRs? Of course not; see the bit above about
"bug reports sent via email". I can't type on a typewriter (I need a
DEL key) and we have no secretary around here to type them for me, so
my bug reports go forever unfiled. Especially since the form is sized
JUST right so that one cannot duplicate it on a normal American laser
printer. I suppose I could try to report them through my salescritter,
but a) I can't get in touch with said salescritter and b) I trust the
salescritter's ability to get important technical details of the bugs
right even less than I trust a secretary's.

--
		 "You don't *run* programs on Ultrix." - Mark Moraes
		 "Right, you chase them." - Rayan Zachariassen
cks at hawkwind.utcs.toronto.edu	           ...!{utgpu,utzoo,watmath}!utgpu!cks