* 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