From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 32446 invoked by alias); 9 May 2002 00:39:21 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 32439 invoked from network); 9 May 2002 00:39:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (216.138.202.10) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 9 May 2002 00:39:20 -0000 Received: from cygnus.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89CAC3C5D; Wed, 8 May 2002 20:39:25 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <3CD9C53D.5060704@cygnus.com> Date: Wed, 08 May 2002 17:39:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:1.0rc1) Gecko/20020429 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Daniel Jacobowitz Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFA] Remote UDP support References: <20020508232636.GA10279@nevyn.them.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2002-05/txt/msg00251.txt.bz2 > A patch for this feature was supported a year or so ago, but never went in. (lack of assignment the last time it was posted from memory). > I had a need for this a couple of days ago, so I did it over from scratch; > it's much easier now than it was at the time. The name of ser-tcp.c is a > bit wrong after this patch; I can either rename the file to ser-net.c or > just update some comments to match. Got a preference? Otherwise OK? From memory, the last time this came up the conclusion was that: - It isn't at all reliable (rather than mostly reliable as across TCP or serial). The entire ``T'' stop packet can be lost and neither GDB, nor the target, would notice. - it wasn't necessary - there are micro tcp implementations around that implement sufficient TCP for the remote protocol to work Check the archives (search for mark salter?). One theory put forward was to have GDB print a banner(6) sized warning (and get confirmation) before accepting the option. Andrew