From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29476 invoked by alias); 6 Oct 2004 17:21:13 -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 29381 invoked from network); 6 Oct 2004 17:21:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 6 Oct 2004 17:21:10 -0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.34 #1 (Debian)) id 1CFFT3-0002Ei-SK; Wed, 06 Oct 2004 13:20:46 -0400 Date: Wed, 06 Oct 2004 17:21:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Felix Lee Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: GDB/MI snapshots between major release's Message-ID: <20041006172045.GA8428@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Felix Lee , gdb@sources.redhat.com References: <20041003163918.GB7030@white> <01c4a9ce$Blat.v2.2.2$d01969a0@zahav.net.il> <20041004131906.GB8121@white> <200410041533.i94FXsPa014648@juw15.nfra.nl> <20041004155805.GF8121@white> <01c4aabb$Blat.v2.2.2$e64c8fc0@zahav.net.il> <20041005140736.GC13586@nevyn.them.org> <01c4ab8d$Blat.v2.2.2$93dba3c0@zahav.net.il> <20041006112703.GB11747@white> <20041006171253.58184502AB6@stray.canids> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20041006171253.58184502AB6@stray.canids> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.5.1+cvs20040105i X-SW-Source: 2004-10/txt/msg00150.txt.bz2 On Wed, Oct 06, 2004 at 10:12:53AM -0700, Felix Lee wrote: > Bob Rossi : > > If at some point, GDB decides not to honor MI2 anymore, I need to make > > sure that I know that. If my front end only supports MI2, and GDB > > supports only MI3, than the function you are suggesting will not be good > > enough for me. > > I think there's no chance that situation will occur. > > if sometime in the future gdb stops honoring MI7, then presumably > it honors a newer version, MI21. since your front-end knows > about MI21, then you don't care that MI7 is gone. so that's not > a problem. > > if MI7 is the only version that a front-end knows, then that's a > strong argument against removing MI7, so that's not a problem > either. Actually, I doubt GDB will continue to support old MI versions indefinitely. It may be very hard. For instance, at some point we may report multiple events to the front end at once (from different threads); or multiple addresses associated with a breakpoint. Faking an old interface will not be worth the trouble. I expect there will be points at which front ends will have to be updated to talk to a new GDB. -- Daniel Jacobowitz