From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16574 invoked by alias); 1 May 2004 12:08:08 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 16562 invoked from network); 1 May 2004 12:08:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nick.uklinux.net) (194.247.50.239) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 1 May 2004 12:08:06 -0000 Received: by nick.uklinux.net (Postfix, from userid 501) id 6C77A75FDE; Sat, 1 May 2004 13:07:45 +0100 (BST) From: Nick Roberts MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <16531.37648.806738.186535@nick.uklinux.net> Date: Sat, 01 May 2004 12:08:00 -0000 To: Bob Rossi Cc: Andrew Cagney , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] implements MI "-file-list-exec-sections" (updated) In-Reply-To: <20040501040929.GB17480@white> References: <16530.51947.983270.138336@nick.uklinux.net> <20040501040929.GB17480@white> X-SW-Source: 2004-05/txt/msg00013.txt.bz2 > I think everyone agrees, changing the CLI would be the worst possible > thing GDB could do. I'm not sure if thats true, I was just talking about timing. Its probably not reasonable or even realistic to insist that CLI output never changes. > For some unfortunate reason, every front end would break in some subtle > way if the output of the CLI was modified. In some way, it doesn't > really make sense to just coordinate GDB with Emacs and not every other > front end, right? Well, GDB and Emacs are both part of the GNU Project. I don't know how much this counts for, but at the moment GDB issues a new release about twice a year whereas the last release of Emacs from CVS HEAD was in September 2001. I am saying that these very different timetables are difficult to work with. As maintainer of CGDB, you (Bob) are presumably free to make a new release whenever you wish. Nick