Re: eliminate deprecated_insert_raw_breakpoint. what's left.

[Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>]

On 09/10/2014 03:45 PM, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
> Joel Brobecker wrote:
>>>> I would be surprised if anyone still cared about IRIX anymore.
>>>> I enjoyed working on that system, but I no longer have access
>>>> to it, so can't support it anymore.
>>>
>>> I see that IRIX seems to be in "Retired Mode" as of 12/31/2013:
>>> http://www.sgi.com/tech/irix/?_mips_support.html
>>
>> And I saw yesterday on the binutils mailing-list that IRIX support
>> was removed from GCC already. I think these are all pretty strong
>> indicators.
>>
>>> Do we have a current process to formally obsolete/remove support
>>> for old systems?
>>>
>>> [ I guess another candidate to remove might be Alpha OSF/1 ... ]
>>
>> Here is what I found:
>> https://sourceware.org/gdb/wiki/Internals%20Obsoleting-code
>>
>> I agree we can obsolete Alpha OSF/1 as well.
> 
> Once OSF/1 and IRIX are gone, I hope all of the ECOFF/mdebug debug
> format support can go as well (mipsread.c, mdebugread.c etc.) ...
> 
> The process documented in the Wiki is a bit weird (adding OBSOLETE
> to *every line* of those files ???)

Yeah, I recall seeing such OBSOLETE-marked files long ago.  I agree
it's weird.

> 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I think that obsoleting page is obsolete.  :-)

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?

Thanks,
Pedro Alves