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
next prev parent 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