From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7670 invoked by alias); 9 May 2003 15:22:49 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 7600 invoked from network); 9 May 2003 15:22:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO concert.shout.net) (204.253.184.25) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 9 May 2003 15:22:48 -0000 Received: from duracef.shout.net (duracef.shout.net [204.253.184.12]) by concert.shout.net (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h49FMgFN002303; Fri, 9 May 2003 10:22:42 -0500 Received: from duracef.shout.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by duracef.shout.net (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h49FMg16009380; Fri, 9 May 2003 10:22:42 -0500 Received: (from mec@localhost) by duracef.shout.net (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id h49FMf8c009379; Fri, 9 May 2003 11:22:41 -0400 Date: Fri, 09 May 2003 15:22:00 -0000 From: Michael Elizabeth Chastain Message-Id: <200305091522.h49FMf8c009379@duracef.shout.net> To: ac131313@redhat.com, eflash@gmx.net, jkj@sco.com Subject: RE: Deprecate dwarf and mdebug support, delete nlm? Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com X-SW-Source: 2003-05/txt/msg00125.txt.bz2 The SCO target is i[34567]86-*-sco3.2v5*. With gcc 2.95.3, this target prefers DWARF 1 or SDB. With gcc 3.2.2, this target prefers DWARF 2 or SDB. (see config.gcc and config/i386/sco5.h in the source). Are there still a lot of SCO users with gcc 2? If there are, is it reasonable to require them to upgrade to gcc 3 when they upgrade their gdb? (The proposal is to phase out DWARF 1 only. DWARF 2 is one of the best, most current formats). Michael C