From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19203 invoked by alias); 27 Jan 2009 05:01:52 -0000 Received: (qmail 19122 invoked by uid 22791); 27 Jan 2009 05:01:50 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_50 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from smtp-outbound-2.vmware.com (HELO smtp-outbound-2.vmware.com) (65.115.85.73) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 27 Jan 2009 05:01:47 +0000 Received: from mailhost2.vmware.com (mailhost2.vmware.com [10.16.67.167]) by smtp-outbound-2.vmware.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94FF549008; Mon, 26 Jan 2009 21:01:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.20.92.151] (promb-2s-dhcp151.eng.vmware.com [10.20.92.151]) by mailhost2.vmware.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 767878E5C2; Mon, 26 Jan 2009 21:01:45 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <497E9260.90203@vmware.com> Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2009 05:01:00 -0000 From: Michael Snyder User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.12 (X11/20080411) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Marc Khouzam CC: Joel Brobecker , teawater , David Daney , "gdb@sourceware.org" Subject: Re: Discussing the next GDB release (GDB 7.0?) References: <20090116033948.GI31296@adacore.com> <6D19CA8D71C89C43A057926FE0D4ADAA06C52409@ecamlmw720.eamcs.ericsson.se> In-Reply-To: <6D19CA8D71C89C43A057926FE0D4ADAA06C52409@ecamlmw720.eamcs.ericsson.se> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2009-01/txt/msg00178.txt.bz2 Marc Khouzam wrote: >> From: Joel Brobecker >> Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2009 10:40 PM >> >>>> Do we need process record and replay in 7.0 release? >>>> It's in submit process. >>> And catch syscall? I think it hang too. >> Neither of these features seem critical to me, but that's only >> a personal opinion. As GDB Maintainer, I think of my role as being >> the technician that implements the recommendations of the GDB >> Maintainers. If the maintainers think this is critical, then >> I'll add them to the list as blocking for the release. >> >> That being said, this does not mean that they will not make it >> for the release. If they get checked in before we branch, then >> they're in... > > For what its worth, I can't speak to the level of criticality of > process record and replay, but we would really like to see this in > the 7.0 release. Ditto! > I am almost ready with the Eclipse support for it (I manually > applied the patches to GDB) and plan on doing a demo at EclipseCon. > From what I was told, reverse debugging generates a lot of interest > in people and would be a great addition to GDB. Ditto. Last year I gave a talk about being a GDB maintainer at the Silicon Valley Linux User's Group, and the entire Q&A period was taken up by "When can we get this reverse debugging of which you speak?" > > Great work on the whole Reverse Debugging feature and > Process Record and Replay! > > Marc