From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15135 invoked by alias); 4 Feb 2003 16:12:43 -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 15127 invoked from network); 4 Feb 2003 16:12:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO pup) (68.14.80.122) by 172.16.49.205 with SMTP; 4 Feb 2003 16:12:43 -0000 Received: from peter by pup with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 18g5gf-0000cV-00 for ; Tue, 04 Feb 2003 11:12:41 -0500 Date: Tue, 04 Feb 2003 16:12:00 -0000 From: Peter Kovacs To: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: obsoleting annotate level 2 Message-ID: <20030204161241.GA2354@kovax.org> Mail-Followup-To: gdb@sources.redhat.com References: <20030204124435.GB2565@white> <15935.57871.225622.319870@localhost.redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <15935.57871.225622.319870@localhost.redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-PGP-Key: http://wwwkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x9BA23416 X-PGP-Fingerprint: BBA2 6148 807D 9F3C D883 EF34 5278 DD02 9BA2 3416 X-SW-Source: 2003-02/txt/msg00073.txt.bz2 On Tue, Feb 04, 2003 at 10:53:51AM -0500, Elena Zannoni wrote: > Interesting, I don't know if you are aware, gdb has already a curses > interface. configure gdb with --enable-tui and invoke with --tui. > > Documentation is at: > http://sources.redhat.com/gdb/current/onlinedocs/gdb_22.html#SEC197 > > Would it make sense to unify the efforts? Even though i see you want a > completely separate UI. I am also a developer on the cgdb project. We discussed to some length the possibility of unifying the efforts and we decided it might not be such a good idea because: 1. We need to use cgdb with older versions of gdb such as 4.17.gnat.3.14p-1, which we've standardized on here at work. 2. We wish to keep future compatibility with other console debuggers (perl -d, jdb, etc). Really point #1 is a deal-breaker for us. It is basically the entire reason we started this project. We do hope that cgdb can be written in such a way that it could become the default curses front-end to gdb, but we certainly don't want to step on any toes in that regard. As for the MI issues, I think we'd be willing to move over to the MI interface if and when it supports some of the readline style of input. Cgdb is designed to offer *everything* that gdb does plus some extras (source view, break points, shortcut commands). I'm not entirely sure what work has been going on in this area, as I've just recently started paying attention to this list. Thanks, Peter Kovacs -- Peter D. Kovacs