From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29154 invoked by alias); 12 May 2006 16:21:06 -0000 Received: (qmail 29126 invoked by uid 22791); 12 May 2006 16:21:05 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from e34.co.us.ibm.com (HELO e34.co.us.ibm.com) (32.97.110.152) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Fri, 12 May 2006 16:21:03 +0000 Received: from d03relay04.boulder.ibm.com (d03relay04.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.106]) by e34.co.us.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id k4CGL0Nm004792 for ; Fri, 12 May 2006 12:21:00 -0400 Received: from d03av02.boulder.ibm.com (d03av02.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.168]) by d03relay04.boulder.ibm.com (8.12.10/NCO/VER6.8) with ESMTP id k4CGKxM9186154 for ; Fri, 12 May 2006 10:20:59 -0600 Received: from d03av02.boulder.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d03av02.boulder.ibm.com (8.12.11/8.13.3) with ESMTP id k4CGKx8v004110 for ; Fri, 12 May 2006 10:20:59 -0600 Received: from dufur.beaverton.ibm.com (dufur.beaverton.ibm.com [9.47.22.20]) by d03av02.boulder.ibm.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id k4CGKxsu004080; Fri, 12 May 2006 10:20:59 -0600 Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Checking for supported packets - revised From: PAUL GILLIAM Reply-To: pgilliam@us.ibm.com To: Daniel Jacobowitz Cc: gdb@sourceware.org In-Reply-To: <20060512132450.GA4925@nevyn.them.org> References: <20060330215247.GA9062@nevyn.them.org> <20060331135859.GA27522@nevyn.them.org> <20060331141958.GA28073@nevyn.them.org> <20060509230123.GA19291@nevyn.them.org> <20060510225451.GA19844@nevyn.them.org> <20060512132450.GA4925@nevyn.them.org> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 18:24:00 -0000 Message-Id: <1147447025.3672.60.camel@dufur.beaverton.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.2 (2.2.2-5) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-05/txt/msg00168.txt.bz2 On Fri, 2006-05-12 at 09:24 -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > - If your stub responds to qSupported, the response must include > every packet it supports. > - If your stub does not respond to qSupported, only a fixed list > of packets will be used or probed for. So 'qOffsets' will still > be tried, but the new qFooBaz (added after qSupported) will be > assumed missing. I would vote for this one. In essence it says "we will cut some slack to stubs too old to have 'qSupported', but we expect it to be there for newer stubs". This sound reasonable to me. -=# Paul #=-