From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3946 invoked by alias); 14 Jun 2002 18:48:44 -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 3937 invoked from network); 14 Jun 2002 18:48:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (216.138.202.10) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 14 Jun 2002 18:48:43 -0000 Received: from cygnus.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8847D3CCC; Fri, 14 Jun 2002 14:48:42 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <3D0A3A8A.8070205@cygnus.com> Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2002 11:48:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:1.0.0) Gecko/20020613 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Daniel Jacobowitz Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [MI] -break-insert: (a)synchronous? References: <3D0A1AE0.4030209@cygnus.com> <20020614182410.GA20123@nevyn.them.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2002-06/txt/msg00112.txt.bz2 > On Fri, Jun 14, 2002 at 10:49:53AM -0700, Keith Seitz wrote: > >> On Fri, 14 Jun 2002, Andrew Cagney wrote: >> > >> > This means another MI version bump (currently it is on 1). See how mi0 >> > vs mi1 was handled (especially in the testsuite). > >> >> I'll take care of it. Unless I hear otherwise, I will modify the code to >> support old and new. Are we going to set a date or time limit on >> deprecating the old mis? > > > Please? In particular, I don't want us to keep accumulating testsuites > for different protocol versions forever. I was thinking of having it release or time limited. One release may not be long enough though. Mind you, at this stage I'm guessing as people using MI haven't got their changes merged in. Andrew