Mirror of the gdb mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Fernando Nasser <fnasser@redhat.com>
To: Scott Moser <ssmoser@us.ibm.com>
Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: GDB plugin proposal
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 16:42:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <3CC49F1A.DC56EDBE@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.43.0204221731440.569-100000@brickies.austin.ibm.com>

Scott Moser wrote:
> 
>    - From what I understand (not a lawyer), modules would be required to
>      be GPLed for a few reasons:
>       1. to call 'add_cmd' you need to include gdbcmd.h , which is GPLed

Leave the call to add_cmd() inside gdb, in the code that loads a
plug-in.
So, your plug-in code just provides a description in a standard format
and does not have to include the GPL'ed header file.

Besides, we may change add_cmd() and plug-ins would stop working, so it
is
better to define and interface at a higher level of abstraction anyway.


>       4. the README from gdb/gdbtk/library/plugins/HOW-TO mentions "As the
>       plug-ins will be loaded into Insight/GDB for execution, the terms of
>       the GPL also apply to the plug-in code."  I believe the same would
>       apply for plugins of this nature.

I wrote that based on list discussions (among Engineers, mind you -- not 
lawyers).  It is based on the assumption that only general purpose
libraries
that are part of the standard OS distribution (or a major component) can
be binary only. But that is the conservative approach.


>    - if 'plugin unload' proves difficult (at first glance, it seems maybe), it
>      could possibly be left out, as loading and unloading doesn't provide much
>      foreseeable benefit

Someone can have created user defined commands, added commands to
breakpoints
etc.  It can be done but will require a major rewrite of CLI code.  I
also
believe it does not add much and doesn't worth the effort.


>    - Its possible that GDB would eventually want to allow an LGPL like
>      interface for plugins so that binary only plugins could be created.
> 

We are trying to create a libgdb which would be used to create the 
interactive debugger as well as be incorporated into other tools.
Once this is achieved, the possibility of making the libgdb a LGPL'ed
library will have to be discussed.





-- 
Fernando Nasser
Red Hat Canada Ltd.                     E-Mail:  fnasser@redhat.com
2323 Yonge Street, Suite #300
Toronto, Ontario   M4P 2C9


  reply	other threads:[~2002-04-22 23:42 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2002-04-22 15:52 Scott Moser
2002-04-22 16:42 ` Fernando Nasser [this message]
2002-04-22 16:47   ` Fernando Nasser
2002-04-22 18:57   ` Andrew Cagney
2002-04-23  8:54   ` Scott Moser
2002-04-23 11:28     ` Daniel Berlin
2002-04-23 12:58       ` Eli Zaretskii
2002-04-23 13:07         ` Per Bothner
2002-04-23 13:19         ` Daniel Berlin
2002-04-23 22:49           ` Eli Zaretskii
2002-04-24 10:52             ` Daniel Berlin
2002-04-23 16:15       ` Stan Shebs
2002-04-23  2:16 Matthew Fyles

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=3CC49F1A.DC56EDBE@redhat.com \
    --to=fnasser@redhat.com \
    --cc=gdb@sources.redhat.com \
    --cc=ssmoser@us.ibm.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox