Features vs infrastructure (was Re: Tracepoint support in Cygnus GDB ?)

[Stan Shebs]

Andrew Cagney wrote:

>> I just thumbed through the GDB website and sources, and gdb/TODO seemed
>> like it was mostly a list of desired infrastructure changes.  For 
>> instance,
>> I didn't see a mention of the desirability of tracepoint support for 
>> native
>> debugging, although that is an obvious item for a wishlist.  Perhaps the
>> todo list should be separated into "user-visible" and "infrastructure"
>> sections, with appropriate xrefs, so that everybody is aware of what's
>> desired.
>
>
> GDB tracks new features using the bug database.  I see one tracepoint 
> change which is me pointing out that an architecture method is broken. 
> Must remember to delete the TODO file.

OK, I see plenty there, but most look like infrastructure changes,
and of the 139 items, I still can't tell which are the most
important features that users have been waiting for.  That's
where a real document comes in handy; you can use it to explain
why features A, B, and C are more important than D, E, and F,
or why feature G must wait for infrastructure changes H, I, and J.

Stan