This is the mail archive of the gdb@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the GDB project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Bob's MI objective


> Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 08:13:21 -0400
> From: Bob Rossi <bob@brasko.net>
> Cc: cagney@gnu.org, gdb@sources.redhat.com
> 
> OK, Andrew gave me the exact opposite answer here. That is why I asked again
>    http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb/2004-10/msg00177.html
> 
> maybe I'm wrong, and you guys are saying the same thing?

It surely sounds like Andrew is saying that all versions of MI except
the latest one are completely unsupported and broken, but I really
doubt he meant that.  After all, if that were the case, why would we
bother to keep those older versions in GDB?

But please wait for Andrew's definitive response.

> It is important to me that the CVS snapshots try to at least honor the
> last major MI version before the version bump. Is this something
> everyone thinks will be possible?

I think that an MI version that was just been superceded by a newer
one will not bitrot right away.  So you can count on it for quite some
time.  Also, all the tests for that version are still there to make
sure it works at least as well as it used to.

> I do understand that old MI protocols could be dropped because of
> maintenance issues. Would we go as far as dropping the last stable
> protocol, this could potentially be a problem for me.

I don't think the GDB maintainers will ever agree to such a radical
measure, even if someone were to suggest it.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]