From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8739 invoked by alias); 12 May 2005 21:46:46 -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 8700 invoked from network); 12 May 2005 21:46:41 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO steven) (202.80.36.62) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 12 May 2005 21:46:41 -0000 Received: from sakuraindustries.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by steven (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A4F31294DD for ; Fri, 13 May 2005 08:49:46 -1100 (GMT+11) Message-ID: <428504D9.7000609@sakuraindustries.com> Date: Thu, 12 May 2005 21:46:00 -0000 From: Steven Johnson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040115 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "insight@sources.redhat.com" Subject: Re: Current Status of Insight References: <428460FB.3090607@sakuraindustries.com> <1115911019.4491.17.camel@lindt.uglyboxes.com> In-Reply-To: <1115911019.4491.17.camel@lindt.uglyboxes.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2005-q2/txt/msg00030.txt.bz2 Hi Keith, Thanks for the informative reply. I suppose the question is (and this is the right place to ask it): 1. What do the user's of Insight think about this? Is it worth it? Does anyone really care anymore? >At one time I considered branching, dumping all the Tcl code (assigned >to Red Hat) and rewriting in some form of gtk (all new code assigned to >FSF). I don't believe there is enough interest to justify this work, >though. > > 2. Is there enough interest to do what you say, and attempt to create an insight derivitave, that is assignable to the FSF? (Not suggesting Keith do it, just gauging the interest, if it is there, then there should be people willing to contribute to the effort (money or time or both).) >DDD, Eclipse CDT, xgdb (and friends) are all still options. > Yes they are, ive tried to use them, and even though they have some nice fancy features, they just lack basic usability. I keep finding myself wishing they were more like Insight. But that could just be my simple brain. And for what its worth ive never found the MI or CL Tack a front end over the top approach to be (a) very effective, or (b) very reliable. I much prefered how Insight really just linked with GDB and went from there. There is a maintained TUI in GDB, so I cant see why there shouldnt be a maintained GUI in GDB either. So what your really saying (if i understand your post), is the main impediment to breathing new life into insight (apart from re-writing large chunks) is a standard FSF assignment. Sheesh, i think that is really weak for RedHat's part, given everything they have made out of the work of the FSF and the GNU Licence. How hard is it to just sign it over, they obviously dont give two tosses about it, so whats the big deal. (But i Digress). I am sadened by this state of affairs, because I believe Insight was a really great part of GDB. Steven Johnson