Re: eliminate deprecated_insert_raw_breakpoint. what's left.

Joel Brobecker
2014-09-10T15:50:30Z

> > and it seems we didn't follow
> > it in the last major round of obsoleting code either:
> > https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-announce/2007/msg00000.html
> >
> > I think using a process along similar lines might be best.
>
> Definitely agreed.
>
> I think that obsoleting page is obsolete. :-)

OK with me as well. I suspect this was to allow for easy reviving
if someone stepped up, but completely OBE now that we've moved
to git.

So let's discuss the new obsoleting procedure, so we can document it:

. I think that the first 4 steps (post email on gdb@, wait a week,
then on gdb-announce, wait another week) are fine. Anyone thinks
we should go straight to gdb-announce?

My thinking is that people interested in maintaining a port
with enough skills to do so are likely to already be on gdb@,
so we can avoid sending an extra mail to gdb-announce. But
the traffic on gdb-announce being very low, and the frequency
at which we deprecate targets being fairly small as well,
I wouldn't object to a simpler procedure where we email
gdb-announce directly.

. Remove steps 5 & 6 that mark the code as obsolete, only keeping
the last test, which removes the code. I'd add a note to add
a NEWS entry.

> Meanwhile, I'd prefer removing deprecated_insert_raw_breakpoint
> now rather than keeping it just for IRIX. I may send a
> best-effort-but-untested patch for IRIX. If things break, it'd be
> the job of whoever shows up as wanting to maintain IRIX to
> fix and modernize things further. WDYT?

Sounds like a plan.

--
Joel