From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jim Blandy To: Stan Shebs Cc: mark@codesourcery.com, gdb@sourceware.cygnus.com Subject: Re: PATCH to buildsym.c Date: Fri, 03 Dec 1999 09:08:00 -0000 Message-id: References: <199912012043.MAA07059@andros.cygnus.com> X-SW-Source: 1999-q4/msg00437.html I'm sympathetic to the concerns about possibly breaking other systems, but I don't think it's good to put off changes with known benefits just because we're not sure whether it might break something, though we're not sure what. It's sort of paralyzing to approach things that way. I think we should make the change, and comment the code with an explanation of why it should be this way. If it does break something else, at least we can make a decision in the presence of data. In any case, as the symtab maintainer, I think the change is okay. When Stan turns out to be right, and the next Mars Lander mission fails because they can't set a breakpoint where they need to, I'll throw myself on my sword, okay? Mark, you offered to commit the change, but do you really have commit access to GDB? I'm so out of touch... >From mark@codesourcery.com Fri Dec 03 10:03:00 1999 From: Mark Mitchell To: jimb@cygnus.com Cc: shebs@cygnus.com, gdb@sourceware.cygnus.com Subject: Re: PATCH to buildsym.c Date: Fri, 03 Dec 1999 10:03:00 -0000 Message-id: <19991203100251E.mitchell@codesourcery.com> References: <199912012043.MAA07059@andros.cygnus.com> X-SW-Source: 1999-q4/msg00438.html Content-length: 896 >>>>> "Jim" == Jim Blandy writes: Jim> In any case, as the symtab maintainer, I think the change is Jim> okay. When Stan turns out to be right, and the next Mars Jim> Lander mission fails because they can't set a breakpoint Jim> where they need to, I'll throw myself on my sword, okay? And I'll hurl myself upon the still-exposed, but now-bloody point. Jim> Mark, you offered to commit the change, but do you really Jim> have commit access to GDB? I'm so out of touch... No, I don't. I had thought that I had write access (if properly approved) to all of the sourceware archives, but Tom Tromey explained (privately) that the official GDB is still maintained inside Cygnus. So, I'm obliged to make use of your services. Thanks! -- Mark Mitchell mark@codesourcery.com CodeSourcery, LLC http://www.codesourcery.com >From shebs@cygnus.com Fri Dec 03 10:57:00 1999 From: Stan Shebs To: jimb@cygnus.com Cc: gdb@sourceware.cygnus.com Subject: Re: GDB i386 ports are now all cleaned up Date: Fri, 03 Dec 1999 10:57:00 -0000 Message-id: <199912031857.KAA05260@andros.cygnus.com> References: X-SW-Source: 1999-q4/msg00439.html Content-length: 711 From: Jim Blandy Date: 01 Dec 1999 15:54:10 -0500 Well, at least their register maps are cleaned up, anyway. Chris Faylor just finished updating the Cygwin port, so now all the x86 ports of GDB that are in active use rely on a single common base for their register definitions, provided by tm-i386.h. This makes it a bit easier to write code which benefits all the x86 ports. Check out http://sourceware.cygnus.com/gdb/papers/linux/i386-includes.png to see the current state of affairs. Thanks to everyone for helping clean up the mess! And thank *you* for coordinating things! This will help make the next release of GDB the best one ever! Stan