From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3970 invoked by alias); 11 Oct 2004 02:57:24 -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 3963 invoked from network); 11 Oct 2004 02:57:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 11 Oct 2004 02:57:23 -0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.12.11/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9B2vHIm014305 for ; Sun, 10 Oct 2004 22:57:18 -0400 Received: from localhost.redhat.com (porkchop.devel.redhat.com [172.16.58.2]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i9B2vDr07341; Sun, 10 Oct 2004 22:57:14 -0400 Received: from gnu.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7FBF228CD; Sun, 10 Oct 2004 22:56:49 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <4169F671.4010409@gnu.org> Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 14:12:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-GB; rv:1.4.1) Gecko/20041009 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Bob Rossi Cc: Eli Zaretskii , Daniel Jacobowitz , gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Bob's MI objective References: <416451B0.3060306@gnu.org> <20041006212652.GB13271@white> <20041008023243.GA15320@white> <01c4ad2b$Blat.v2.2.2$f25b86a0@zahav.net.il> <20041008134218.GA1467@nevyn.them.org> <01c4ad53$Blat.v2.2.2$750a0be0@zahav.net.il> <4167081A.3020306@gnu.org> <20041008221026.GA16824@white> <20041010181350.GA17779@white> In-Reply-To: <20041010181350.GA17779@white> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2004-10/txt/msg00278.txt.bz2 C'mon Bob, it's the Canadian thanksgiving long weekend! Strewth! > On Fri, Oct 08, 2004 at 06:10:26PM -0400, Bob Rossi wrote: > >>> On Fri, Oct 08, 2004 at 05:35:22PM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote: >> >>>> > @samp{--interpreter=mi} (or @samp{--interpreter=mi2}) causes >>>> > @value{GDBN} to use the @dfn{@sc{gdb/mi} interface} (@pxref{GDB/MI, , >>>> > The @sc{gdb/mi} Interface}) included since @var{GDBN} version 6.0. The >>>> > previous @sc{gdb/mi} interface, included in @value{GDBN} version 5.3 and >>>> > selected with @samp{--interpreter=mi1}, is deprecated. Earlier >>>> > @sc{gdb/mi} interfaces are no longer supported. ... and it is lifted straight from the manual. That you did read the manual right? >>> This is basically what I need to know. I've asked several times and >>> would very much appreciate an answer from the people that are capable of >>> giving it. (The answer could be a simple yes or no) >>> * Will GDB support at least one stable MI protocol for an official release? >>> (This answer is obviously "yes", and does not have to be answered) >>> * Will GDB support more than one stable MI protocols for an official release? In the past GDB tested both mi1 and mi2 so that that stage they were probably described as "supported". Now that only mi2 is tested, nad mi1 is deprecated, your call. >>> * Will GDB support one stable MI protocol for a CVS snapshot? The above does, right? >>> * Will GDB support more than one stable MI protocols for a CVS snapshot? Who knows, I still don't see the point of all this, in particular, if you're going to implement a library, why it has to be kept separate to GDB? And as others have pointed out, you're creating a problem when there isn't one. Andrew