Summary of the role of MDbg and Cordbg

Shared Source CLR is available for V2

Mike Stall's .NET Debugging Blog — Fri, 24 Mar 2006 23:30:54 GMT

In case you haven't already heard from every other blogger (like Shawn, JasonZ and Brad) , V2.0 of the...

Blue Badged

Sajay Antony — Mon, 06 Feb 2006 16:03:02 GMT

I wanted to basically post about how it is to work for Microsoft, but the people here are so amazing...

re: Summary of the role of MDbg and Cordbg

Brian — Tue, 08 Nov 2005 20:10:20 GMT

I'm glad to hear you suggest it will remain as, like some of the comments in that entry you refer to, I use it to debug end user sites. SDK is much easier to install than VS, and DbgClr offers a much easier debugging interface than CorDbg. Haven't played with MDbg though, so don't know yet how it compares, functionality-wise. Maybe a topic for a post?

DbgClr

Mike Stall - MSFT — Tue, 08 Nov 2005 19:06:48 GMT

Oh yeah ... DbgClr. We always forget about that because none of *ever* use it. DbgClr is completely owned by Visual Studio. However, they view DbgClr in the same way we view Cordbg.
See here for more:
http://blogs.msdn.com/andypennell/archive/2005/02/21/377621.aspx

I doubt they'll be able to kill it without replacing it with something.

re: Summary of the role of MDbg and Cordbg

Brian — Tue, 08 Nov 2005 15:26:00 GMT

You mention CorDbg, MDbg & VS, but skip over DbgClr, which was a very handy tool in .NET 1.x (haven't looked to see if it ships in 2.0). How do you see that debugger positioned? It makes an ideal mini-VS type debug shell for debugging apps at source level in any arbitrary language.

re: Summary of the role of MDbg and Cordbg

Dan McKinley — Tue, 08 Nov 2005 03:31:44 GMT

"Once NTSD supports real managed code debugging (and not just SOS)..."

That's great news, thanks! I was worried that the NT debuggers would never get support beyond SOS.