From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4335 invoked by alias); 20 Aug 2003 02:42:57 -0000 Mailing-List: contact insight-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: insight-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 4326 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2003 02:42:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 20 Aug 2003 02:42:57 -0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h7K2gut15577 for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2003 22:42:56 -0400 Received: from pobox.corp.redhat.com (pobox.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.156]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h7K2gus20458; Tue, 19 Aug 2003 22:42:56 -0400 Received: from [150.1.200.14] (vpn50-44.rdu.redhat.com [172.16.50.44]) by pobox.corp.redhat.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h7K2gt2T006120; Tue, 19 Aug 2003 22:42:55 -0400 Subject: Re: General question From: Keith Seitz To: Peter Reilley Cc: "insight@sources.redhat.com" , Jim MacGregor In-Reply-To: <038901c366c3$2dc2c1a0$c9d145cc@lndnnh.adelphia.net> References: <1061305385.1588.23.camel@lindt.uglyboxes.com> <20030820074339.3417c874.rod_boyce@stratexnet.com> <00fd01c366aa$4691a750$c9d145cc@lndnnh.adelphia.net> <20030820115356.05a09f2d.rod_boyce@stratexnet.com> <1061343799.1660.10.camel@lindt.uglyboxes.com> <038901c366c3$2dc2c1a0$c9d145cc@lndnnh.adelphia.net> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: Message-Id: <1061347457.1654.16.camel@lindt.uglyboxes.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2003 02:42:00 -0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2003-q3/txt/msg00115.txt.bz2 On Tue, 2003-08-19 at 19:31, Peter Reilley wrote: > The issue of the DLL has been long since resolved. I thought > that all parties to the issue were happy with the outcome. > Is there some remaining issue to be resolved? I don't think so... (I was just clarifying my earlier statement about how the wiggler was not a supported debug device in gdb *using the wiggler dll*. I should have been clearer on that point.) I misread the orignal post and was under the impression that the poster was using one of the old versions with the DLL. My mistake. The message quite clearly states that he downloaded the libremote, which is, of course, a gdbserver-like thing for the wiggler (and there is certainly no doubt that it does not "conflict" with the GPL in any way). I apologize for the confusion. It's now just a matter of helping the user get his setup working. Keith