From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19055 invoked by alias); 29 Jan 2003 17:16:19 -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 19039 invoked from network); 29 Jan 2003 17:16:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (172.16.49.200) by 172.16.49.205 with SMTP; 29 Jan 2003 17:16:18 -0000 Received: from redhat.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A4CA4074; Wed, 29 Jan 2003 12:16:17 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <3E380C60.3040502@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 17:16:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20021211 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Arnaud Charlet Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [Various] obsoleting the annotate level 2 interface References: <20030128232906.B22772@dublin.int.act-europe.fr> <3E3768D5.1060504@redhat.com> <20030129095458.B24931@dublin.int.act-europe.fr> <3E37F0F2.7020506@redhat.com> <20030129163145.A4340@dublin.int.act-europe.fr> <3E37F6B0.7000306@redhat.com> <20030129165106.A7279@dublin.int.act-europe.fr> <20030129155602.GB10725@redhat.com> <20030129170101.A9059@dublin.int.act-europe.fr> <3E37FEF4.7080904@redhat.com> <20030129173411.A14044@dublin.int.act-europe.fr> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2003-01/txt/msg00492.txt.bz2 > Right, that's not acceptable in the context of a multipurpose and portable > GUI front-end, where basically people can plug the version of gdb they like. > So Apple's approach of hacking a particular version of gdb is not feasible, > and not something that can be maintained in the long run. Er, reality check. Even ACT have a customized GDB. I'm pretty sure that ACT, when shipping their GUI, only test it against one, and possibly two, local GDB releases. Reality is that any GUI dependant on the CLI / annotations has reliability problems by design. Apple, like everyone else, want to kill off their branch. >> The problems they have encountered have been turned into bug reports. >> See the bug database. The only big one is the console and both Apple >> and Eclipse managed to hack around it. > > > Does it mean that there are no plans to actually fix this critical missing > feature, and that each front-end will have to "hack around it" ? I'd conclude the exact oposite. Given the `big iron' supporting MI, it is very likely that dedicated resources can be found that fix these problems. All the parties involved know that they can't sustain local GDB branches. Andrew