From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17004 invoked by alias); 1 Feb 2002 01:22:23 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 16949 invoked from network); 1 Feb 2002 01:22:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nevyn.them.org) (128.2.145.6) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 1 Feb 2002 01:22:20 -0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 16WSPI-0002J7-00; Thu, 31 Jan 2002 20:22:24 -0500 Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 17:22:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Quality Quorum Cc: Michael Snyder , "Sarnath K - CTD, Chennai." , gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Thread Support for remote debugging Message-ID: <20020131202224.B8691@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Quality Quorum , Michael Snyder , "Sarnath K - CTD, Chennai." , gdb@sources.redhat.com References: <20020131181217.B4883@nevyn.them.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.23i X-SW-Source: 2002-01/txt/msg00386.txt.bz2 On Thu, Jan 31, 2002 at 06:22:07PM -0500, Quality Quorum wrote: > If you are talking about me, I had it done more than one year ago: > http://world.std.com/~qqi, see section about gdb. > > The problem is that (1) redhat never said 'yes we want it' so it is > sitll based on 4.18, (2) there are a few issues which could be > resolved one way or anotehr an readhat never said 'we want it this way'. Red Hat has nothing officially to do with this, besides the number of GDB maintainers they employ. As for the stub - if you want to contribute it, that's nice. But it doesn't really address the question, since current GDBserver doesn't even have any RTEMS support as far as I know. -- Daniel Jacobowitz Carnegie Mellon University MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer