From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9615 invoked by alias); 24 Jul 2006 20:29:02 -0000 Received: (qmail 9602 invoked by uid 22791); 24 Jul 2006 20:29:00 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from heller.inter.net.il (HELO heller.inter.net.il) (192.114.186.73) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Mon, 24 Jul 2006 20:28:55 +0000 Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 (IGLD-80-230-155-218.inter.net.il [80.230.155.218]) by heller.inter.net.il (MOS 3.7.3a-GA) with ESMTP id ABK69437 (AUTH halo1); Mon, 24 Jul 2006 23:28:51 +0300 (IDT) Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2006 20:29:00 -0000 Message-Id: From: Eli Zaretskii To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org In-reply-to: <20060724195118.GE13612@nevyn.them.org> (message from Daniel Jacobowitz on Mon, 24 Jul 2006 15:51:18 -0400) Subject: Re: [RFC] Add expat to the GDB sources Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii References: <20060718134048.GA15685@nevyn.them.org> <20060723224032.GA5168@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> <200607232318.k6NNIV28004376@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <20060724152438.GA17094@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> <20060724195118.GE13612@nevyn.them.org> X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-07/txt/msg00353.txt.bz2 > Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2006 15:51:18 -0400 > From: Daniel Jacobowitz > Cc: cgf-gdb-patches@sourceware.org, gdb-patches@sourceware.org > > On Mon, Jul 24, 2006 at 10:47:54PM +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > > Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2006 11:24:38 -0400 > > > From: Christopher Faylor > > > > > > I would really like to see a day when 'src' will no longer include > > > 'tcl', or 'readline', or 'expat'. > > > > But the same could be said about libiberty, libbfd, and libopcodes. > > Are you saying we should remove them, too, from the GDB distro? If > > not, what is the difference between those and readline? > > In my opinion, the difference is that no independent releases are made > of those projects. They come with GCC and with Binutils. Also, you seem to be saying that, once we remove readline, say, one would have to use the last released version of readline for building GDB, while the build out of CVS will still use the CVS version, is that right? If so, it's a bad idea, IMHO. > In an ideal world, maybe there would be independent > releases, and we could use them. But BFD in particular doesn't have a > stable API and (as recently discussed on the binutils list) doesn't > have an interest in one. > > Compare to readline, tcl, and expat, each used by hundreds of different > programs. Sorry, I don't see any significant difference. The number of packages is not really relevant; what is relevant is how easier or harder would things become for Joe Random Hacker Who Just Wants To Build GDB. Perhaps Chris and Daniel don't see any problem because they have the latest versions of everything on their machines, at all times. From my point of view, about the worst annoyance of Free Software is what happens when I "./configure; make" just to find out that I need two more packages, which in turn want each one two more packages, which want yet some more ... This is where I usually tell myself "Welcome to Free Software, where maintainers care about users much less than they care about their own convenience". (Present company excluded, of course.) In other words, when I download a package, I want it ideally to build out of the box, period. No questions asked, and no additional prerequisites that could turn a simple build job into an agony that lasts the better part of my day, because each prerequisite package needs a bit of tweaking to build and install properly. By contrast, when I get readline etc. with GDB, I can be _certain_ that someone already tried and succeeded to build _this_ version of the library with _this_ configury and _this_ GDB release.