Re: breakpoint extension for remote protocol

Andrew Cagney
1999-04-01T00:00:00Z

"J.T. Conklin" wrote:

> (IMO having "generic" embedded toolchains is essential. It makes no
> sense to have multiple toolchains for essentially the same processor
> (ie. sparc, sparclite, sparclet, etc.) when one would do.)

Agreed.

I think that the difficulties encountered when trying to support cpu variants
within a single GDB are more of a reflection on the GDB architecture then a
problem with the idea of having the debug smarts on the host (rather than the
target).

As Stan noted:

> Those who study recent snapshots will notice that we are doing some
> internal cleanup that will make it easier to support CPU variants
> without kludging.
>

enjoy,

Andrew