From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-return-19690-listarch-gdb=sources.redhat.com@sources.redhat.com>
Received: (qmail 21114 invoked by alias); 6 Oct 2004 11:14:40 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-subscribe@sources.redhat.com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb@sources.redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-help@sources.redhat.com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com
Received: (qmail 21100 invoked from network); 6 Oct 2004 11:14:38 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO lakermmtao01.cox.net) (68.230.240.38)
  by sourceware.org with SMTP; 6 Oct 2004 11:14:38 -0000
Received: from white ([68.9.64.121]) by lakermmtao01.cox.net
          (InterMail vM.6.01.03.04 201-2131-111-106-20040729) with ESMTP
          id <20041006111437.PTOV15782.lakermmtao01.cox.net@white>;
          Wed, 6 Oct 2004 07:14:37 -0400
Received: from bob by white with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian))
	id 1CF9ki-00033e-00; Wed, 06 Oct 2004 07:14:36 -0400
Date: Wed, 06 Oct 2004 11:27:00 -0000
From: Bob Rossi <bob@brasko.net>
To: "Nathan J. Williams" <nathanw@wasabisystems.com>
Cc: GDB <gdb@sources.redhat.com>
Subject: Re: Bumping MI protocol
Message-ID: <20041006111436.GA11747@white>
Mail-Followup-To: "Nathan J. Williams" <nathanw@wasabisystems.com>,
	GDB <gdb@sources.redhat.com>
References: <20041006010100.GA10896@white> <mtuzn30imal.fsf@contents-vnder-pressvre.mit.edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <mtuzn30imal.fsf@contents-vnder-pressvre.mit.edu>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i
X-SW-Source: 2004-10/txt/msg00117.txt.bz2

On Tue, Oct 05, 2004 at 10:59:46PM -0400, Nathan J. Williams wrote:
> Bob Rossi <bob@brasko.net> writes:
> 
> > I am wondering when the MI protocol gets bumped. Besides an MI command
> > that has been changed in an incompatible way, or the actual MI output
> > syntax changing, does the MI version get bumped for other reasons?
> 
> I'd just like to point out that these questions all seem, to a
> not-very-inside observer, highly hypothetical. There's been few enough
> revisions of MI (currently on v2?) that the scenarios you want
> detailed descriptions of and rules for have generally not come up, and
> this (volunteer) community doesn't seem to take kindly to prescriptive
> legislation in such areas.

Exscuse me for being frank, your statements about this question are foolish.

I would like to know if the MI version get's bumped for adding new MI
commands. This is directly related to the implementation of a front end.
Nathan, how could a front end implement an MIX protocol if it doesn't
know what functions that protocol provides?

Bob Rossi