Breakpoint packet

[Andrew Cagney]

"J.T. Conklin" wrote:
> I think this needs to be the default.

I'm not convinced.  The situtation we have here is in fact slightly than
the situtation we currently have with memory.

> Assuming the worst, and requiring people who know it's appropriate
> enable it is better than assuming the best and having end users wonder
> why their targets aren't behaving (breaking at breakpoints that have
> been deleted, etc.).

The spec should (but doesn't) state that set/clear breakpoint operations
should be identpotent :-(  This was suggested when the packet was
originaly discussed.

If GDB ends up sending a second copy of a breakpoint packet then the
target is expected to discard it.

	Andrew