From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16449 invoked by alias); 9 May 2003 20:21:51 -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 16373 invoked from network); 9 May 2003 20:21:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (207.219.125.131) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 9 May 2003 20:21:50 -0000 Received: from redhat.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D99C2B2F; Fri, 9 May 2003 16:21:43 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <3EBC0DD7.70805@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 09 May 2003 20:21:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20030223 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Bob Rossi Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: GDB 6 References: <3EBBDE20.6030007@redhat.com> <20030509180511.GA12861@white> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2003-05/txt/msg00155.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. > > > What exactly do you mean here? > Annotations Level 2 will stay in gdb for version 6.0? > This would truly be a great thing. It won't have been deleted (but it would continue to be on notice). Andrew