From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20787 invoked by alias); 4 Feb 2014 20:20:54 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 20774 invoked by uid 89); 4 Feb 2014 20:20:54 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Tue, 04 Feb 2014 20:20:53 +0000 Received: from int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s14KKmPZ000913 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 4 Feb 2014 15:20:48 -0500 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.11]) by int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s14KKjRg021650; Tue, 4 Feb 2014 15:20:46 -0500 Message-ID: <52F14B9D.3000802@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 04 Feb 2014 20:20:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130625 Thunderbird/17.0.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Eli Zaretskii CC: Joel Brobecker , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [Windows/RFA/commit] Deprecate windows-specific dll-symbols command and aliases References: <1391161706-340-1-git-send-email-brobecker@adacore.com> <834n4k75iu.fsf@gnu.org> <20140131113924.GB4101@adacore.com> <83zjmc5q2i.fsf@gnu.org> In-Reply-To: <83zjmc5q2i.fsf@gnu.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2014-02/txt/msg00027.txt.bz2 On 01/31/2014 11:49 AM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> > If no one else comments on it, I'll go with your suggestion of >> > removing it now. > I think we shouldn't advertise deprecated features. I'm not sure I agree with that policy. I mean, we shouldn't advertise them, yes, and I think we do hide deprecated commands in the CLI at places, IIRC, but as long as they exist, I think they should be documented. IMO, it'd be nicer to users who are currently using such commands, and find out they're deprecated (because GDB warns) if they go to the manual and find both the replacement they should be using (and how), and the docu for the old command, so they can easily map arguments, etc. IOW, IMO, we should instead add a "This command is deprecated; a better alternative is blah blah" note. When I grep for deprecate_cmd, and then look for the documentation of the corresponding deprecated commands, I do find it. E.g., "record restore", "disable tracepoint", "set remotebreak", etc. -- Pedro Alves