From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Andrew Cagney Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [rfa] gdbserver 1/n - PBUFSIZ Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 16:12:00 -0000 Message-id: <20010719161206.A30475@nevyn.them.org> References: <20010719113606.A18944@nevyn.them.org> <3B573F83.4050201@cygnus.com> <20010719132118.A23973@nevyn.them.org> <3B575B8F.4050407@cygnus.com> X-SW-Source: 2001-07/msg00499.html On Thu, Jul 19, 2001 at 06:13:35PM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote: > >> I take it you've also got a few more steps planned, can you give a quick > >> sketch of where you're going? > > > > > > Short term: enough to make gdbserver compile on any targets it still > > currently builds on (I have no clue which these are, for lack of test > > hosts on many of the types) as well as more Linux targets. If you're > > willing, I'd like to do this somewhat messily and before the release of > > 5.1. It doesn't matter too much to me, since I've got no real > > compunctions about shipping a CVS snapshot instead, but it goes against > > my instincts to let gdbserver out the door building on so many fewer > > targets than it did in 5.0. > > > Where's the fire? I know there is going to be a gdb 5.2 or 5.1.1 > because of all the on-going C++ work. I think getting it right is more > important than getting something that looks right. Get it half right > and it it will stay that way for years. Yes, that's true. I'm going to need gdbserver to work in the relatively short-term future, though. I'm perfectly willing to let it slip past 5.1 (and at this stage it seems inevitable). Especially since no one seems to be concerned with gdbserver having broken. > > What I envision from here, longer term: > > - gdbserver registers cleanup. This will mean precisely defining, > > according to present usage, the register packets of every > > gdbserver-supported target, or at least the ones I can test or > > find someone to test for me. A lot of documentation; a lot of > > duplicate code elimination in gdbserver. I'm also going to try to > > define the gdbserver register layout in such a way that GDB can use > > it too (possibly by your flexible string description approach, or > > just a shared structure). > > > Just FYI, structures have compiler compatibility problems. I didn't mean something sent over the wire; I meant a source file that could be linked into both gdb and gdbserver. -- Daniel Jacobowitz Carnegie Mellon University MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer