Re: [RFA] Remote UDP support

Daniel Jacobowitz
2002-05-09T03:01:30Z

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