From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14379 invoked by alias); 9 May 2002 03:01:30 -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 14371 invoked from network); 9 May 2002 03:01:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nevyn.them.org) (128.2.145.6) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 9 May 2002 03:01:27 -0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 175eBH-0002WE-00; Wed, 08 May 2002 23:01:23 -0400 Date: Wed, 08 May 2002 20:01:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Andrew Cagney Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFA] Remote UDP support Message-ID: <20020509030123.GA7864@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Andrew Cagney , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <20020508232636.GA10279@nevyn.them.org> <3CD9C53D.5060704@cygnus.com> <20020509005348.GA14040@nevyn.them.org> <3CD9E563.3000704@cygnus.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3CD9E563.3000704@cygnus.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i X-SW-Source: 2002-05/txt/msg00256.txt.bz2 On Wed, May 08, 2002 at 10:56:35PM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote: > >>- it wasn't necessary - there are micro tcp implementations around that > >>implement sufficient TCP for the remote protocol to work > > > > > >Still bigger than a polled UDP implementation, and much more > >complicated. Implementing a tiny UDP stack is simple! Sure, it isn't > >reliable at all; so use it on small networks and be careful :) > > >>One theory put forward was to have GDB print a banner(6) sized warning > >>(and get confirmation) before accepting the option. > > > > > >I have to admit, I don't see the point. A big warning in the > >documentation, maybe, but such a confirmation query would drive me > >crazy if I actually needed to use this regularly. > > That is the point! I don't want to be around when someone that (shock > horror :-) fails to read the manual and then complains that the GDB > remote protocol isn't reliable. What about a: The only place I documented the syntax is in the manual. Good luck finding it otherwise :) > set remote > i-do-not-understand-gdb-remote-protocol-and-foolishly-think-udp-works-so-please-enable-it > on > > option. > > Have you tried running the testsuite across UDP? Have you tried running the testsuite with gdbserver on a remote machine? :P I had to do some severe butchery to DejaGNU, which I'll clean up as soon as I have time to join the dejagnu list. Trivial things worked fine, though. -- Daniel Jacobowitz Carnegie Mellon University MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer