From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 714 invoked by alias); 9 Oct 2006 20:34:23 -0000 Received: (qmail 706 invoked by uid 22791); 9 Oct 2006 20:34:23 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from sibelius.xs4all.nl (HELO brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl) (82.92.89.47) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Mon, 09 Oct 2006 20:34:20 +0000 Received: from elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl (root@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl [192.168.0.2]) by brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k99KXgff029308; Mon, 9 Oct 2006 22:33:42 +0200 (CEST) Received: from elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl (kettenis@localhost.sibelius.xs4all.nl [127.0.0.1]) by elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.13.8/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k99KXgTV014136; Mon, 9 Oct 2006 22:33:42 +0200 (CEST) Received: (from kettenis@localhost) by elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.13.8/8.13.8/Submit) id k99KXfRg010491; Mon, 9 Oct 2006 22:33:41 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2006 20:34:00 -0000 Message-Id: <200610092033.k99KXfRg010491@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> From: Mark Kettenis To: drow@false.org CC: gdb@sourceware.org In-reply-to: <20061009190037.GA22579@nevyn.them.org> (message from Daniel Jacobowitz on Mon, 9 Oct 2006 15:00:37 -0400) Subject: Re: Is GDB support for IPv6 useful? References: <20061009190037.GA22579@nevyn.them.org> Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-10/txt/msg00047.txt.bz2 > Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2006 15:00:37 -0400 > From: Daniel Jacobowitz > > Jan Kratochvil posted patches on the gdb-patches mailing list which add > support for both "target remote" connecting to IPv6 targets, and gdbserver > listening on IPv6 targets. > > You can already simulate this behavior for GDB, by using "target remote |" > in combination with a helper like socat. If support were added to gdbserver > for using arbitrary file descriptors - not hard, as you can see from Jan's > latest patch - it could do the same. I think native IPv6 support would be preferable if there actually people using it. > But what I'm really interested in is whether native IPv6 support would be > useful for GDB. If it is, we should go ahead and merge it. If no one or > almost no one is ever going to want it, then we shouldn't, and I can write > up some text for the manual about how to use an external program to > implement it. > > I have never used IPv6, for debugging or anything else, so I don't feel able > to make a useful decision about this. I'd like to hear from some people who > do use it. Me neither. Mark