From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6482 invoked by alias); 10 Sep 2014 15:50:30 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 6471 invoked by uid 89); 10 Sep 2014 15:50:30 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: rock.gnat.com Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-SHA encrypted) ESMTPS; Wed, 10 Sep 2014 15:50:28 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56EA01165AD; Wed, 10 Sep 2014 11:50:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from rock.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rock.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id Oag3SUGH3dbp; Wed, 10 Sep 2014 11:50:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1AFEA11659C; Wed, 10 Sep 2014 11:50:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 50505477FF; Wed, 10 Sep 2014 08:50:28 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2014 15:50:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Pedro Alves Cc: Ulrich Weigand , GDB Patches Subject: Re: eliminate deprecated_insert_raw_breakpoint. what's left. Message-ID: <20140910155028.GQ28404@adacore.com> References: <201409101445.s8AEjILM007935@d06av02.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com> <54106C61.7040400@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <54106C61.7040400@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-SW-Source: 2014-09/txt/msg00326.txt.bz2 > > 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 I think that obsoleting page is obsolete.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