Re: [rfc] XML files for PowerPC tdescs

[Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>]

On Sat, Oct 06, 2007 at 01:53:10PM -0300, Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote:
> In rs6000.xml and powerpc-601.xml, you redefine the
> org.gnu.gdb.power.core and/or org.gnu.gdb.power.fpu features, instead of
> including power-core.xml and/or power-fpu.xml. I see that there are a
> few registers that are different in these "private definitions". Would
> it be worthwhile adding comments describing why they can't include
> power-{core,fpu}.xml?

Yeah, that's a good idea.  Thanks.

I didn't want to invent any more complicated mechanisms to handle
these older processors; there are unlikely to be more of them.

Oh, and thanks for making me go back to look at them again.  The
powerpc-601.xml description had a bogus <architecture> line.

> Also, these are more to satisfy my curiosity than anything else:
> The XML files are not under the GPL. What is the reason for this? And
> why use DTDs instead of XML Schemas?

The XML files are not under the GPL because on the one hand, they
contain very little protectable data (derived either from architecture
manuals or from existing GDB public interfaces), and on the other
hand they are useful in odd places (like embedded in the firmware
of a device).  I discussed this with the FSF before contributing
the first batch under their minimalist license.

And they use DTDs because I don't know a thing about XML schemas,
and neither does expat :-)  We take advantage of the DTD to fill
in default values.  I wouldn't object if someone wanted to contribute
a schema, but I don't have any need for one and I don't know how to
do it myself.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery