From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28938 invoked by alias); 9 May 2003 17:12:29 -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 28881 invoked from network); 9 May 2003 17:12:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO crack.them.org) (146.82.138.56) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 9 May 2003 17:12:28 -0000 Received: from nevyn.them.org ([66.93.61.169] ident=mail) by crack.them.org with asmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 19EBQR-0004DM-00 for ; Fri, 09 May 2003 12:12:52 -0500 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 19EBQ0-00040h-00 for ; Fri, 09 May 2003 13:12:24 -0400 Date: Fri, 09 May 2003 17:12:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: GDB 6 Message-ID: <20030509171224.GA15350@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: gdb@sources.redhat.com References: <3EBBDE20.6030007@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3EBBDE20.6030007@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i X-SW-Source: 2003-05/txt/msg00135.txt.bz2 On Fri, May 09, 2003 at 12:58:08PM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote: > The sole objective for GDB 6 was to have GDB multi-arch. Since Joel has > now committed a change that multi-arch partial's the HP/PA, and all > architectures can be built multi-arch partial, it can be argued that GDB > has technically reached this goal(1). > > Given this, I think the next release of GDB should be named ``GDB 6''. > > In doing this, there is an oportunity to, identify as obsolete (but not > actually delete) a few extra bits.. The following come to mind: > > - non event loop platforms > - DWARF (a.k.a., DWARF 1) > > People with systems that rely on said features can always download the > GDB 5 series debuggers. > > With regard to annotations, someone [me] still still has the > documentation and testsuite to update (....). That, I think is the only > ``must have'' thing for the next GDB release. Other things such as NPTL > et.al. are obvious nice to have (and probably will because more people > are motivated to get them in :-). > > Andrew > > (1) Just ignore the cleanup that will eventually follow, oh and that one > of the SPARC and HP/PA variants still need some work. It sounds mighty good to me. I'd like to see the new dwarf-frame code finished before GDB 6, but it sounds like we'll have (just?) enough time. -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer