Re: [PATCH] Hooks still needed for annotations

[Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>]

On Wed, Jun 15, 2005 at 11:52:48AM -0400, Bob Rossi wrote:
> > I don't much think a parser is GDB's responsibility.  Offering one as a
> > convenience, sure, maybe.  Note that a lot of frontends won't get to
> > use it anyway!  If we ship it with GDB, then it's going to be covered
> > under the GPL.
> 
> Well, could I maintain a copy under the LGPL, and then contribute all of
> the modifications to the FSF GDB under the GPL?

LGPL would not help much; you'd need something BSD-ish.  You could, of
course, do whatever you wanted to do with code that you wrote.  But I
don't think there's much point to that; if you contribute it to GDB,
that will be so that other developers can help you maintain it and keep
it up to date with changes in MI.  You won't get all the other GDB
contributors to relicense their work.

> Either way, I don't care much about commercial tools. If a good parser
> is created, I think it's possible a lot of front ends will use it. For
> instance, KGDB, DDD and GVD are all free projects that could benefit
> from such a technology. Right?

KGDB is a stub, not a frontend.  DDD could use it - not sure if
anyone's updating DDD enough nowadays to bother.  GVD could, but would
be unlikely to unless you wrote the parser in Ada!  (Not that Ada can't
use C bindings, but the GPS maintainers would presumably prefer
language consistency.)

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC