From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <bills@emu-bark.com>
X-Original-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr
Delivered-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr
Received: from mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.83])
	by sympa.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1B87E7EEB4
	for <caml-list@sympa.inria.fr>; Mon,  4 Feb 2013 06:34:08 +0100 (CET)
Received-SPF: None (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: no sender
  authenticity information available from domain of
  bills@emu-bark.com) identity=pra; client-ip=68.178.252.105;
  receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr;
  envelope-from="bills@emu-bark.com";
  x-sender="bills@emu-bark.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible
Received-SPF: None (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: no sender
  authenticity information available from domain of
  bills@emu-bark.com) identity=mailfrom;
  client-ip=68.178.252.105;
  receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr;
  envelope-from="bills@emu-bark.com";
  x-sender="bills@emu-bark.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible
Received-SPF: None (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: no sender
  authenticity information available from domain of
  postmaster@p3plsmtpa11-04.prod.phx3.secureserver.net)
  identity=helo; client-ip=68.178.252.105;
  receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr;
  envelope-from="bills@emu-bark.com";
  x-sender="postmaster@p3plsmtpa11-04.prod.phx3.secureserver.net";
  x-conformance=sidf_compatible
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AqgBABNHD1FEsvxpnGdsb2JhbABEvz0WDgEBAQEBCAsJCRQngl5APRYYAwIBAgE3ARMNCAEBiA2eY6AukVIDiGaTKY17
X-IPAS-Result: AqgBABNHD1FEsvxpnGdsb2JhbABEvz0WDgEBAQEBCAsJCRQngl5APRYYAwIBAgE3ARMNCAEBiA2eY6AukVIDiGaTKY17
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,596,1355094000"; 
   d="scan'208";a="1216597"
Received: from p3plsmtpa11-04.prod.phx3.secureserver.net ([68.178.252.105])
  by mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 04 Feb 2013 06:34:07 +0100
Received: from [127.0.0.1] ([173.26.186.224])
	by p3plsmtpa11-04.prod.phx3.secureserver.net with 
	id w5a11k0074qv3b9015a1Ns; Sun, 03 Feb 2013 22:34:02 -0700
Message-ID: <510F484F.3020702@emu-bark.com>
Date: Mon, 04 Feb 2013 00:34:07 -0500
From: William Smith <bills@emu-bark.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.0; WOW64; rv:13.0) Gecko/20120614 Thunderbird/13.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: OCAML <caml-list@inria.fr>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: [Caml-list] Ocamlbuild + Ocamldebug + Windows = ?

I am trying to use ocamldebug with my program being compiled with 
ocamlbuild on Windows.

I think I have the ocamlbuild command figured out:

ocamlbuild -no-links -cflags -g -lflags -g TestRegex.byte

I use either
ocamldebug _build\TestRegex.byte or

copy _build\TestRegex.byte TestRegex.exe
ocamldebug TestRegex.exe

and get the same results for both.

When I use my MSVC tool chain copy of ocamldebug/ocamlbuild and ocamlc, 
I get "Loading program... cannot connect to debugger at 127.0.0.1" when 
I enter the first "step" command in ocamldebug. (This is when I am 
running inside of a Windows Cmd prompt.)

When I build with the cygwin tool chain ocamldebug appears to be 
working.  (Also, I've been checking with the "which" command and haven't 
found any evidence of me getting the toolchains confounded with each other).

[As I understand it, I'll need to eventually debug the msvc toolchain 
version because I'll have a project that is a mixture of C++ and OCaml.]

Is ocamldebug even the right tool for that mixed scenario?    I have 
been debugging with tracing statements successfully but I wanted to 
build up my skills using a debugger.

gdb currently gives "no debugging symbols found" when I launch it on 
either of the TestRegex.exe's but I don't know if that's even relevant 
in the long run for my plans.

Bill