From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29366 invoked by alias); 7 Jan 2003 04:17:28 -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 29355 invoked from network); 7 Jan 2003 04:17:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO duracef.shout.net) (204.253.184.12) by 209.249.29.67 with SMTP; 7 Jan 2003 04:17:27 -0000 Received: (from mec@localhost) by duracef.shout.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h074HFs15628; Mon, 6 Jan 2003 22:17:15 -0600 Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2003 04:17:00 -0000 From: Michael Elizabeth Chastain Message-Id: <200301070417.h074HFs15628@duracef.shout.net> To: ezannoni@redhat.com, gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: gcov on gdb X-SW-Source: 2003-01/txt/msg00057.txt.bz2 Elena Zannoni writes: > In doing so, I've noticed that a lot of lines in the stabread.c file > are never executed because they are old functions (1996) to support > cfront. I think we could obsolete this stuff. I've not found anything > in a google search for cfront that was more recent than 1995. More generally, I wish gdb had documentation about which compilers, assemblers, and linkers that gdb supports, especially for C++. Personally, I take the view that I prefer to test-bed gdb with other Free Software. Specifically that means these licenses: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#GPLCompatibleLicenses http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#GPLIncompatibleLicenses I don't know what FSF policy is on this. Michael C apologies to elena z for the tangent on her thread