From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10937 invoked by alias); 13 Jan 2010 18:44:32 -0000 Received: (qmail 10924 invoked by uid 22791); 13 Jan 2010 18:44:31 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail.codesourcery.com (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (38.113.113.100) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 18:44:28 +0000 Received: (qmail 14017 invoked from network); 13 Jan 2010 18:44:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO macbook-2.local) (stan@127.0.0.2) by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 13 Jan 2010 18:44:26 -0000 Message-ID: <4B4E1484.2090908@codesourcery.com> Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2010 18:44:00 -0000 From: Stan Shebs User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (Macintosh/20090812) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Eli Zaretskii CC: Stan Shebs , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Trace file support References: <4B4BD994.9070701@codesourcery.com> <838wc386hd.fsf@gnu.org> <4B4D06E8.4070601@codesourcery.com> <831vhu8wt0.fsf@gnu.org> In-Reply-To: <831vhu8wt0.fsf@gnu.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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 X-SW-Source: 2010-01/txt/msg00353.txt.bz2 Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2010 15:34:00 -0800 >> From: Stan Shebs >> CC: Stan Shebs , gdb-patches@sourceware.org >> >> >>> I wonder if we really need such a detailed description of the file's >>> format in the user manual. Who would need that? can we simply send >>> the interested reader to some header file? >>> >>> >> Good point - if one uses GDB to both create a trace file and read from >> it, then it's effectively a private format. There is the case of the >> target agent writing the file directly, but I expect that will be less >> common. On the other hand, if a target stub/agent does write trace >> files, then we should make some degree of stability promise (could one >> get compiled into Linux kernel?), and the GDB manual is our main avenue >> for describing that promise. If we went the header file route, then >> there is a license issue for the file too. >> > > Then perhaps we should move the details to gdbint.texinfo, and leave > only the basic stuff in gdb.texinfo. > > I started doing that, but you know, it's really looking out of place. The rest of the internals manual is all source files and macros and such; it would never be looked by anyone just using GDB, not even advanced users doing tricky things. I'm now thinking appendix to the user's manual, a la agent expressions, which are also part of GDB's user-visible behavior, albeit a rather arcane part. :-) Stan