From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17081 invoked by alias); 3 Jan 2013 16:04:01 -0000 Received: (qmail 17058 invoked by uid 22791); 3 Jan 2013 16:03:59 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,KHOP_SPAMHAUS_DROP,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 03 Jan 2013 16:03:55 +0000 Received: from int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r03G3roP013059 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 3 Jan 2013 11:03:53 -0500 Received: from barimba (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r03G3kB8002806 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Thu, 3 Jan 2013 11:03:52 -0500 From: Tom Tromey To: Jan Kratochvil Cc: Marc Khouzam , "'gdb-patches\@sourceware.org'" Subject: Re: [commit] [rfc] Print MI fullname even for non-existing files References: <20121217155859.GA8029@host2.jankratochvil.net> <8738z4y1el.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <20121225080350.GB11349@host2.jankratochvil.net> <20130103154349.GA10450@host2.jankratochvil.net> Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2013 16:04:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20130103154349.GA10450@host2.jankratochvil.net> (Jan Kratochvil's message of "Thu, 3 Jan 2013 16:43:49 +0100") Message-ID: <87d2xm6yoy.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.2.91 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain 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: 2013-01/txt/msg00042.txt.bz2 Jan> This does not matter, the point was that GDB does not fully keep Front Ends Jan> backward compatibility. I think we should never promise compatibility for "maint" commands. Tom