From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-return-19593-listarch-gdb=sources.redhat.com@sources.redhat.com>
Received: (qmail 25769 invoked by alias); 2 Oct 2004 16:28:24 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-subscribe@sources.redhat.com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb@sources.redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-help@sources.redhat.com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com
Received: (qmail 25750 invoked from network); 2 Oct 2004 16:28:23 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO lakermmtao08.cox.net) (68.230.240.31)
  by sourceware.org with SMTP; 2 Oct 2004 16:28:23 -0000
Received: from white ([68.9.64.121]) by lakermmtao08.cox.net
          (InterMail vM.6.01.03.04 201-2131-111-106-20040729) with ESMTP
          id <20041002162821.WRFA17605.lakermmtao08.cox.net@white>;
          Sat, 2 Oct 2004 12:28:21 -0400
Received: from bob by white with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian))
	id 1CDmkA-0001Wn-00; Sat, 02 Oct 2004 12:28:22 -0400
Date: Sat, 02 Oct 2004 16:38:00 -0000
From: Bob Rossi <bob@brasko.net>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: MI and backwards compatibility
Message-ID: <20041002162822.GD5224@white>
Mail-Followup-To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>, gdb@sources.redhat.com
References: <20041001142517.GD4100@white> <01c4a89c$Blat.v2.2.2$40bcdc20@zahav.net.il>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <01c4a89c$Blat.v2.2.2$40bcdc20@zahav.net.il>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i
X-SW-Source: 2004-10/txt/msg00020.txt.bz2

On Sat, Oct 02, 2004 at 06:23:08PM +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 10:25:17 -0400
> > From: Bob Rossi <bob@brasko.net>
> > 
> > So, here is an example that I don't see to far fetched within the next
> > few years. The question is, what does backwards compatibility mean?
> > This is what I expect,
> > 
> > FE 1.0 or after to never work with GDB 1.0
> > FE 1.0 to work with GDB 2.0 on using mi2.
> > FE 2.0 to work with GDB 2.0 and 3.0 using mi2
> >            and with GDB 4.0 on with mi3
> > FE 3.0 to work with GDB 2.0 and 3.0 using mi2
> >            and with GDB 4.0 with mi3
> >            and with GDB 5.0 with mi4
> 
> I don't see any problems with what you described.  Am I missing
> something?

Are you saying that the goal of GDB is to be backwards compatible with
old MI protocols? That is a simple question that i am asking.

If so, I need the documentation of all of these protocols. I need to
know how to implement an MI1 protocol, MI2 protocol, ...

Thanks,
Bob Rossi