<?xml version="1.0"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="/rss.xsl.xml"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel>
    <title>Changes in Cargo.toml</title>
    <description></description>
    <language>en</language>
    <copyright>Copyright 2015</copyright>
    <generator>Java</generator><item>
        <title>133a0ef4 - Debugging: add the debug-main world. (#12756)</title>
        <link>http://172.16.0.5:8080/history/wasmtime-44.0.1/crates/debugger/Cargo.toml#133a0ef4</link>
        <description>Debugging: add the debug-main world. (#12756)* Debugging: add the debug-main world.This PR &quot;draws the rest of the owl&quot; for the debug-mainworld (bytecodealliance/rfcs#45). This includes a WIT world that hostsdebug components that have access to &quot;host debug powers&quot; via adebugging API, and the ability to load such a debug-component and giveit control of the main program as a debuggee when using `wasmtimerun`.The WIT is namespaced to `bytecodealliance:wasmtime` and is slightlyaspirational in places: for example, the host does not yet implementinjection of early return values or exception-throws. I intend to fillout a series of TODO issues once this all lands to track followup(&quot;post-MVP&quot;) work.This PR does not include any debug components. I separately have agdbstub component, with which I tested and co-developed this host-sideimplementation. My plan is to land it in a followup PR as a componentthat will be embedded in/shipped with the Wasmtime CLI and availableunder an easy-to-use CLI option. Once we have that gdbstub component,we can also implement end-to-end integration tests that boot up LLDBand run through an expected interaction. (Separately, thoseintegration tests will require a release of wasi-sdk to ship an LLDBbinary that we can use.) As such, there are no real tests in this PR:interesting behaviors only really occur with a full end-to-end flow.The integration with the CLI is a little awkward (we internally buildanother `wasmtime run` command that invokes the debug component, andtie it together with the debuggee via a special `invoke_debugger` API;this seemed less bad than reworking all of the WASI setup to be morereusable). Happy to take more ideas here.* Review feedback.* Review feedback.* Review feedback: update vendor-wit.sh.* Review feedback: -Ddebugger-arg= -&gt; -Darg=.* Review feedback.* Review feedback.* Review feedback: factor host.rs into several submodules.* Review feedback: rename Debugger to Debuggee on host side.* Review feedback: split inherit_stdin_stdout, and add corresponding options for the debug component.* Review feedback.* Review feedback.* Add simple debug-component tests.* Add wasm32-wasip2 target in a few places in CI* Cargo vets for wstd dependency.* Add wasm32-wasip2 in more places* fix debug-component test dependence on componentization byte offsets* Review feedback.* Fix cancel-safety of EventFuture.* Fix: Interrupted events should only occur after interrupt(), not on every epoch yield.* Review feedback.* Review feedback: strip down WASI imports in debugger world.* fold debugger test component back into wasip1 + adapter test artifact compilation flow

            List of files:
            /wasmtime-44.0.1/crates/debugger/Cargo.toml</description>
        <pubDate>Fri, 13 Mar 2026 18:58:17 +0000</pubDate>
        <dc:creator>Chris Fallin &lt;chris@cfallin.org&gt;</dc:creator>
    </item>
<item>
        <title>0b980f4f - Migrate debugger to `wasmtime::error` (#12261)</title>
        <link>http://172.16.0.5:8080/history/wasmtime-44.0.1/crates/debugger/Cargo.toml#0b980f4f</link>
        <description>Migrate debugger to `wasmtime::error` (#12261)

            List of files:
            /wasmtime-44.0.1/crates/debugger/Cargo.toml</description>
        <pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2026 21:31:31 +0000</pubDate>
        <dc:creator>Nick Fitzgerald &lt;fitzgen@gmail.com&gt;</dc:creator>
    </item>
<item>
        <title>405ab558 - Debugger: add top-level crate and async wrapper allowing for a &quot;debugger environment&quot;. (#12183)</title>
        <link>http://172.16.0.5:8080/history/wasmtime-44.0.1/crates/debugger/Cargo.toml#405ab558</link>
        <description>Debugger: add top-level crate and async wrapper allowing for a &quot;debugger environment&quot;. (#12183)* Debugger: add top-level crate and async wrapper allowing for a &quot;debug environment&quot;.The debug support in Wasmtime so far is structured around asynccallbacks that occur at certain kinds of events, like breakpoints. Thisis a suitable foundation but makes for an awkward implementation of atop-level debugger implementation, which likely has an event loopdealing with user commands (via a UI or a protocol connection) andexpects to perform actions such as &quot;run until next breakpoint&quot;.This PR introduces a new crate that wraps a `Store` in a `Debugger`.This wrapper embodies an inner async body that can perform whateveractions it likes on the `Store` that is passed back in. This inner bodyis spawned as an async task. The debugger wrapper registers its own`DebugHandler` callback that communicates with the outside world viabidirectional command/response queues.On the &quot;outside&quot;, the `Debugger` presents an interface suitable forinserting into a debug protocol server or UI: an async method that runsuntil next event and returns that event, and a method that permitsquerying or modifying the store whenever the `run` method is notexecuting. The latter operates by sending a closure over the queue,because the `Store` must continue to be owned by the async task that is(still) running and suspended in async callbacks.Right now, this is exercised only via a few unit tests, but the intentis to next build up the &quot;top half&quot; of the debugger using thisabstraction, e.g. by running a gdbstub protocol server (likely as a Wasmcomponent in a &quot;debug-main WIT world&quot; -- RFC needed for this).Also, when we eventually move debugging over to native use of`run_concurrent`, this paradigm should remain mostly unchanged at thislevel of API: there can still be an object that has an async method thatruns and yields the next event, and there can still be a method thattakes a closure that can operate (within its scope only) on the `Store`.A few warts that I could use feedback on:- Cancelation safety is weird. Fibers panic when dropped before  execution of their body completes, and this seems to mean that we  can&apos;t allow a `Debugger` to drop early (or at least, the `tokio::test`  unit test that owns the runtime that runs the async task to finish  before the debugged body completes!). If there is a better way to  handle cancelation safety here, I&apos;m all ears.- It&apos;s not clear to me if the boxed-closure-and-`Any` approach to  providing access to the `Store` is the best we can do, but I suspect  it is.* Cancel safety!* Add new crate to publish.rs script.* Review feedback.* Review feedback: state diagram.* Update after merge from main: new DebugEvent for epoch yields.* Make Debugger drop-safe by making debug event callbacks compatible with fiber teardown.* CI fix on `debugger` crate manifest.- Do not link to non-existent README in new crate.- Remove a few other attributes that our internal crates don&apos;t have (now  the set of attributes at the top level is the same as for the new  error crate).

            List of files:
            /wasmtime-44.0.1/crates/debugger/Cargo.toml</description>
        <pubDate>Wed, 24 Dec 2025 19:00:01 +0000</pubDate>
        <dc:creator>Chris Fallin &lt;chris@cfallin.org&gt;</dc:creator>
    </item>
</channel>
</rss>
