From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-59210-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 24642 invoked by alias); 10 Oct 2008 17:54:16 -0000
Received: (qmail 24632 invoked by uid 22791); 10 Oct 2008 17:54:15 -0000
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from NaN.false.org (HELO nan.false.org) (208.75.86.248)     by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Fri, 10 Oct 2008 17:53:36 +0000
Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) 	by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1BE010194; 	Fri, 10 Oct 2008 17:53:33 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from caradoc.them.org (22.svnf5.xdsl.nauticom.net [209.195.183.55]) 	by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CAAB81018D; 	Fri, 10 Oct 2008 17:53:33 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.69) 	(envelope-from <drow@caradoc.them.org>) 	id 1KoMBA-0002MQ-VX; Fri, 10 Oct 2008 13:53:32 -0400
Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2008 17:54:00 -0000
From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>
To: Michael Snyder <msnyder@vmware.com>
Cc: "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
Subject: Re: [RFA] Resubmit, reverse debugging [0/5]
Message-ID: <20081010175332.GA9028@caradoc.them.org>
Mail-Followup-To: Michael Snyder <msnyder@vmware.com>, 	"gdb-patches@sourceware.org" <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
References: <48EC1781.2030005@vmware.com> <48EF93A5.7060808@vmware.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <48EF93A5.7060808@vmware.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2008-05-11)
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb-patches.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2008-10/txt/msg00326.txt.bz2

On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 10:40:53AM -0700, Michael Snyder wrote:
> Has the discussion converged?

I can't see that it has, but a discussion like this (especially one
with a lot of "ok, I've changed that") is very hard to follow.

The thing that makes me the most uncomfortable, and I think Pedro too,
is the remote protocol changes.  Most other things are easy to fix
later.  For instance, I think that assigning magic meaning to "E06" is
a design mistake.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery