Re: [rfa/doco] PROBLEMS: add regressions since gdb 6.0

[Eli Zaretskii <eliz@elta.co.il>]

> Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 15:25:16 -0500
> From: Andrew Cagney <cagney@gnu.org>
> 
> - arches using the old frame stuff are typically in worse shape

I don't think we can tell users their target is ``in worse shape''
without being specific.  It sounds like FUD, even though I realize it
isn't.  If we want to tell users their target suffers from problems,
we should make the effort of spelling out those problems in terms
users can understand and act upon.

> - arches using the old frame stuff can't use CFI (i.e., can't use 
> exploit GCC's frame debug info)
> 
> the second one in particular is of issue to users - it affects GDB's 
> ability to do decent backtraces (especially through glibc).

This is IMHO better than just ``in worse shape'', but it's still not
detailed enough.  I, for one, don't understand the real meaning of
``decent backtraces''.  What does it mean? do I get garbage in some or
all frames? does the backtrace stop short of showing be the whole
picture? which frames are susceptible and what can I do to alleviate
that (compilation options, perhaps)?  Etc., etc.

Also, are there actually targets that use the old frame stuff _and_
use glibc?  (It strikes me that the crazy techniques used by glibc are
as guilty for breaking GDB as the oldish targets.)