Re: GDB patch

[Daniel Jacobowitz <dan@debian.org>]

On Tue, Dec 10, 2002 at 08:40:46PM +0000, Nigel Stephens wrote:
> I thought the Linux community prided itself on inventing new and 
> "non-standard" extensions to the toolchain  ;-). But yes, we should try 
> to avoid incompatible changes. As part of MIPS we will hopefully have 
> the resources to interface with the rest of the GNU community, and argue 
> for the inclusion of our patches in the CVS trees.

Actually, we've been trying to pride ourselves on not doing so :)

> Yup. SDE-MIPS 1.1 shipped in 1992. :-)

Wow...

> Yeah, that's why we dropped 'R' in our more recent gdb ports, but I 
> wasn't aware of the new use of 'r' - I'll check out that page. 

I think it's an old use, actually.  I'm not sure where it was used
though.

> Certainly 'p' is the logical inverse of 'P', so we'll change our gdb 
> remote stub to use that. So how about accepting Carsten's change, with 
> the 'R' case removed, and 'r' changed to 'p'?

Can't do it.  I strongly suspect that it will render the stub unusable
with current versions of FSF GDB.  Your tools add an explicit size to
the packet and the community tools do not; so when they probe for and
discover the P packet, they will probably try to use it and get
confused.  That's why I'd like to discuss this on the GDB list first.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer