Re: INFO: IBM i System Debugger not stopping on breakpoints

Le 25/04/2024 à 17:45, Wilhelm R. Stanzl a écrit :

INFO: IBM i System Debugger not stopping on breakpoints
=======================================================

Congrats, this is a great post! Great job!

This is a post inspired by two past posts which did not find a correct solution:

"ACS System Debugger doesn't want to work" https://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l/202210/msg00244.html
and
"System Debugger" https://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l/202306/msg00321.html

Both posts describe the problem that System Debugger wouldn't stop on breakpoints (with the breakpoints briefly flashing in yellow).

I also observed this, on a local V7.2 system and on PUB400 V7.5

Yep, I also found this behavior on PUB400. I had a discussion with Sam on the forums https://pub400.com/mbr/forum.nd/listposts?yBID=2&yBSID=5&yTID=2023-06-29-21.47.11.106690

Quick Answer:
-------------

The debugging user needs *JOBCTL special rights for this to work.

This applies to debugging option "Submit and debug program in batch job"

This applies also to debugging option "Debug existing job on system" even if this is one of your jobs (at least on PUB400).

N.B.:
PUB400 won't allow *JOBCTL - for a good reason, see below - so this won't work until (hopefully) IBM fixes this.

[cut]

5) Is there justification to issue a PMR?

       I think there would be. It is not acceptable to require *JOBCTL special rights for a programmer to be able to
       use System Debugger. *JOBCTL special right would enable him to - even inadvertantly - cancel a job other
       than his own on the system. It is not necessary either - STRSRVJOB + STRDBG don't need it either.
      
       I can't be asking to change the beahaviour of MATPRATR of course, but nonetheless, the requirement for *JOBCTL
       special authority for debugging seems overdrawn to me.
      
       I am, however, pessimistic about IBM to be willing to alter the debugger to use threads internally
       (which would be the best solution, satisfying MATPRATR requirements; and I personally can't see any technical hindrances to that);
       But then again, what does QTESDBGSVR need MATPRATR for in the first place? Maybe QTESDBGSVR's internal requirement for
       MATPRATR can be avoided?
      
       The way I know IBM these days, I believe they would staunchly promise to correct documentation for System Debugger
       to require *JOBCTL special authority. Oh well ...

Rather than opening a PMR, maybe submitting an Idea would be more successful?

      
      

Concluding with mixed feelings -
Wilhelm Stanzl