* Much of remote-utils obsolete now?
@ 2002-08-30 14:15 Daniel Jacobowitz
2002-09-04 9:26 ` Stan Shebs
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Daniel Jacobowitz @ 2002-08-30 14:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb
remote-utils.[ch] claim to be generic support functions, but except for some
stray calls in remote-array.c which could be easily removed, all the
references were in the now-obsolete remote-bug.c module. I'd like to see
this code die too, especially the undocumented and pretty much useless
"remote" command.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: Much of remote-utils obsolete now?
2002-08-30 14:15 Much of remote-utils obsolete now? Daniel Jacobowitz
@ 2002-09-04 9:26 ` Stan Shebs
2002-09-04 9:29 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Stan Shebs @ 2002-09-04 9:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Daniel Jacobowitz; +Cc: gdb
Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
>remote-utils.[ch] claim to be generic support functions, but except for some
>stray calls in remote-array.c which could be easily removed, all the
>references were in the now-obsolete remote-bug.c module. I'd like to see
>this code die too, especially the undocumented and pretty much useless
>"remote" command.
>
remote-utils was obsolete several years ago, and I bet not one single
person has used
remote-array in five years at least.
Stan
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: Much of remote-utils obsolete now?
2002-09-04 9:26 ` Stan Shebs
@ 2002-09-04 9:29 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2002-09-04 10:16 ` Andrew Cagney
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Daniel Jacobowitz @ 2002-09-04 9:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stan Shebs; +Cc: gdb
On Wed, Sep 04, 2002 at 09:26:09AM -0700, Stan Shebs wrote:
> Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
>
> >remote-utils.[ch] claim to be generic support functions, but except for
> >some
> >stray calls in remote-array.c which could be easily removed, all the
> >references were in the now-obsolete remote-bug.c module. I'd like to see
> >this code die too, especially the undocumented and pretty much useless
> >"remote" command.
> >
> remote-utils was obsolete several years ago, and I bet not one single
> person has used
> remote-array in five years at least.
Well, then :) Andrew, sounds like we have some more obsoletion
candidates.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: Much of remote-utils obsolete now?
2002-09-04 9:29 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
@ 2002-09-04 10:16 ` Andrew Cagney
2002-09-04 10:44 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Cagney @ 2002-09-04 10:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Daniel Jacobowitz; +Cc: Stan Shebs, gdb
> On Wed, Sep 04, 2002 at 09:26:09AM -0700, Stan Shebs wrote:
>
>> Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
>>
>
>> >remote-utils.[ch] claim to be generic support functions, but except for
>> >some
>> >stray calls in remote-array.c which could be easily removed, all the
>> >references were in the now-obsolete remote-bug.c module. I'd like to see
>> >this code die too, especially the undocumented and pretty much useless
>> >"remote" command.
>> >
>
>> remote-utils was obsolete several years ago, and I bet not one single
>> person has used
>> remote-array in five years at least.
>
>
> Well, then :) Andrew, sounds like we have some more obsoletion
> candidates.
Yep. My obsolete queue has maxed out though (until after 5.3 has been
released and I've zapped any of the current stuff).
Perhaphs bug report it so that someone remembers to ``accidently
deleted'' when the i960 stuff goes in ~2 months.
Andrew
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: Much of remote-utils obsolete now?
2002-09-04 10:16 ` Andrew Cagney
@ 2002-09-04 10:44 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-01-09 19:00 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Daniel Jacobowitz @ 2002-09-04 10:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb
On Wed, Sep 04, 2002 at 01:16:23PM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> >On Wed, Sep 04, 2002 at 09:26:09AM -0700, Stan Shebs wrote:
> >
> >>Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> >>
> >
> >>>remote-utils.[ch] claim to be generic support functions, but except for
> >>>some
> >>>stray calls in remote-array.c which could be easily removed, all the
> >>>references were in the now-obsolete remote-bug.c module. I'd like to see
> >>>this code die too, especially the undocumented and pretty much useless
> >>>"remote" command.
> >>>
> >
> >>remote-utils was obsolete several years ago, and I bet not one single
> >>person has used
> >>remote-array in five years at least.
> >
> >
> >Well, then :) Andrew, sounds like we have some more obsoletion
> >candidates.
>
> Yep. My obsolete queue has maxed out though (until after 5.3 has been
> released and I've zapped any of the current stuff).
>
> Perhaphs bug report it so that someone remembers to ``accidently
> deleted'' when the i960 stuff goes in ~2 months.
Check. It's gdb/685.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: Much of remote-utils obsolete now?
2002-09-04 10:44 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
@ 2003-01-09 19:00 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Daniel Jacobowitz @ 2003-01-09 19:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb
On Wed, Sep 04, 2002 at 01:44:31PM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 04, 2002 at 01:16:23PM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> > >On Wed, Sep 04, 2002 at 09:26:09AM -0700, Stan Shebs wrote:
> > >
> > >>Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> > >>
> > >
> > >>>remote-utils.[ch] claim to be generic support functions, but except for
> > >>>some
> > >>>stray calls in remote-array.c which could be easily removed, all the
> > >>>references were in the now-obsolete remote-bug.c module. I'd like to see
> > >>>this code die too, especially the undocumented and pretty much useless
> > >>>"remote" command.
> > >>>
> > >
> > >>remote-utils was obsolete several years ago, and I bet not one single
> > >>person has used
> > >>remote-array in five years at least.
> > >
> > >
> > >Well, then :) Andrew, sounds like we have some more obsoletion
> > >candidates.
> >
> > Yep. My obsolete queue has maxed out though (until after 5.3 has been
> > released and I've zapped any of the current stuff).
> >
> > Perhaphs bug report it so that someone remembers to ``accidently
> > deleted'' when the i960 stuff goes in ~2 months.
>
> Check. It's gdb/685.
Hey, Andrew... should we //OBSOLETE or just ``accidentally delete''
these? I'm open for either. That's remote-utils.[ch] and
remote-array.c.
Incidentally, mon960-rom.o can be removed now; nothing left references
it.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2003-01-09 19:00 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2002-08-30 14:15 Much of remote-utils obsolete now? Daniel Jacobowitz
2002-09-04 9:26 ` Stan Shebs
2002-09-04 9:29 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2002-09-04 10:16 ` Andrew Cagney
2002-09-04 10:44 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-01-09 19:00 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox