This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [PATCH] Let dwarf2 CFI's execute_stack_op be used outside ofCFI
- From: Daniel Berlin <dan at dberlin dot org>
- To: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at mvista dot com>
- Cc: Jim Blandy <jimb at redhat dot com>, <gdb-patches at sources dot redhat dot com>
- Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 14:46:39 -0500 (EST)
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] Let dwarf2 CFI's execute_stack_op be used outside ofCFI
On Tue, 2 Apr 2002, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 02, 2002 at 02:28:12PM -0500, Jim Blandy wrote:
> >
> > Daniel Berlin <dan@dberlin.org> writes:
> > > > It may well be overengineered. A libdwarf is indeed what I had in
> > > > mind; I thought it might be nice to start putting together the pieces
> > > > for it.
> > >
> > > 1. The existing libdwarf is now LGPL'd, so it would be easier to just use
> > > that, if you wanted a dwarf reader (in fact, this is what the majority of
> > > consumers do use).
> > > It would make more sense to just implement what's missing (it contains no
> > > macro info reading, and no generic location expression support).
> > > 2. Ulrich Drepper has the beginnings of a GPL'd libdwarf already that
> > > works pretty well.
> >
> > Does Uli's libdwarf have an expression evaluator?
> >
> > > I'll do it, i'm just concerned we are thinking of duplicating a library
> > > for the sake of duplicating a library.
> > > :)
> >
> > I didn't know about the existing libdwarf, or Uli's. It would be nice
> > to start using those, if we can. And I'll bet if the interfaces are
> > troublesome for GDB, then Uli would be happy to change it.
>
> I didn't know that the existing libdwarf had been LGPL'd; the copy on
> SGI's site certainly hasn't been, but that's a bit old.
Very old, actually.
ftp://ftp.sgi.com/sgi/dev/davea/libdwarf2001May23.tar.gz is the latest
around.
> However, it's
> exceedingly unlikely we could get the copyright assigned to the FSF.
So?
--Dan