From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mo DeJong To: insight@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: TODO list (REPOST) Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 10:39:00 -0000 Message-id: References: <87r95nth6y.fsf@creche.cygnus.com> X-SW-Source: 2000-q4/msg00062.html On 11 Oct 2000, Tom Tromey wrote: > >>>>> "Fernando" == Fernando Nasser writes: > > Fernando> Yes, that is the idea. A modification in Mo's patch that > Fernando> will default to -w if the name contains "insight" and to -nw > Fernando> otherwise would do that. > > The GNU Coding Standards ask that the program's behavior not depend on > the name of the program: > > Please don't make the behavior of a utility depend on the name used > to invoke it. It is useful sometimes to make a link to a utility with > a different name, and that should not change what it does. > > Tom If we just call it "insight", then there will be no problem with hiding the regular command line gdb when the user runs gdb from the PATH. I would say this alone is reason enough to call it insight and nothing else. Does anyone have any good reasons for calling it gdb? I am all for giving credit to the Gnu project, I just think we have confused people long enough by calling it gdb. Mo DeJong Red Hat Inc