From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrew Cagney To: brendan@dgs.monash.edu.au Cc: gdb@sourceware.cygnus.com, insight@sourceware.cygnus.com Subject: Re: GDB and Insight CVS repositories. Date: Wed, 18 Aug 1999 18:45:00 -0000 Message-id: <37BB6197.627A5E05@cygnus.com> References: <199908190042.RAA27565@andros.cygnus.com> <37BB5E59.C4BB46BC@dgs.monash.edu.au> X-SW-Source: 1999-q3/msg00076.html Brendan Simon wrote: > From a purist point of view I think it would be better to keep the packages > seperate, regardless of whether Insight is built as a seperate application or > an integrated application. If it is relatively simple to unpack Insight > sources into a seperate sub directory of the GDB source then this sounds like > it would keep RMS happy and keep the GUI repository seperate from the GDB > repository. I guess this is akin to gcc-core, gcc-c++, gcc-fortran, etc > distribution archives. I guess the difference is that all these components > are officialy accepted by GNU. > > If this was to happen, would this mean that gdb would require patches ? At present yes. However, I believe that that can be fixed. See separate my separate e-mail about --with-gdb-interpreter=... No one has sat down and taken the time to revamp the startup code so that a second interpreter can be dropped on - not hard, just needs to be done. > > Does GDB have an external API (interprocess comms, TCP/UDP sockets) so that > other GUIs could communicate without having to parse CLI output ? Hmm, your doing well. My things to do today includes write up an additional e-mail putting forward a way that GDB can progress on this issue. Andrew