Re: gdbserver/{,,}.c?; Was: [rfa] gdbserver overhaul

Andrew Cagney
2002-09-27T22:35:46Z

> Which part are you referring to? The low-linux.c breakup? I can do
> that; I can also test it on 80% of the affected targets, and I'd
> consider such a patch ``obvious''.

Yes the split.

Check the guideline for obvious. Your patch will knowingly break
something. Hmm, will someone object?

> I don't really see the point. It's no more (in fact probably less)
> broken than all the other targets, which make the same or worse
> assumptions. I'm trying to fix them, not delete them [:)] I'm open to
> marking it obsolete, certainly.

The MIPS gbserver sim is very broken. GDB has code to carefully map
between a simulator and its internal register numbering. It was
originally added for the mips-gdb <-> sim interface.

>> With respect to sparc, if it really doesn't even build, then well, how
>> motivated are you? [:-)] You could fix it, obsolete it or transform it
>> (still broken).
>
>
> For Solaris? I'm not motivated in the slightest. In fact, I'm tempted
> to mark all non-Linux gdbserver targets as obsolete, and repair them
> one at a time as volunteers, or at least testers, pop their heads up.

I don't think that is reasonable - it would be setting a precident for
me doing things like ignoring / breaking currently working linux targets
because (say) most are not multi-arch.

enjoy,
Andrew