Re: --with-babeltrace generates many FAILs

[Yao Qi <yao@codesourcery.com>]

Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com> writes:

> Right.  From your description, newer babeltrace rejects the workaround
> because it's more strict now, which I read as the workaround
> somehow knowingly violating the CTF spec, hence, the workaround
> assuming babeltrace or other CTF consumers would remain lax.  The
> point was that CTF generated by a GDB with 1.1.0 wouldn't be readable
> by a GDB with 1.1.2, and vice-versa.  If it remains in place, the
> assumption that we can infer whether a workaround will be necessary
> or usable from the babeltrace version that is used to build the
> producer GDB isn't strictly correct.  But maybe "assumption" was a
> too strong word.  (I hope you didn't feel I was pointing fingers at
> you or something.  Certainly not intended!)

No, I didn't feel that :)  I'd like people know the status and problem
clearly and make people on the same page.

>>>>> >> > In general, GDB and GDBserver uses a set of libraries, what are the
>>>>> >> > criteria of
>>>>> >> >
>>>>> >> >  1. stop supporting a version of a library, such as libbabeltrace 1.1.0
>>> > When the burden of supporting it outweighs the benefits?
>>> >
>> That is still too abstract to operate, IMO.
>
> Kind of just as abstract as the question.  :-)
>
> The "benefit" is being able to take advantage of the library's features.
> The "burden" is the cost/effort required to use the library and workaround
> any issues it might have.  When there are bugfix releases that postdate
> a given version, I think the effort to support the older unfixed version
> isn't so much worth it.  The bugs have been fixed at the source, and we
> can simply require builders/integrators upgrade to the latest bugfix
> release (that's what bugfix/stable releases are for!).  Thus, IMO, the
> existence of bugfix releases makes the burden of maintaining support
> for old unfixed versions outweigh the benefits, as we can alternatively
> just say "not our problem: build against the latest fixed version
> instead, please".

This is clear to me.

>
>> Subject: [PATCH] Remove workaround to libbabeltrace 1.1.0 issue
>
> This looks good to me.
>

Patch is pushed in.  Thanks.

-- 
Yao (齐尧)