Preparing for the GDB 5.0 / GDB 2000 / GDB2k release

[Andrew Cagney]

Quality Quorum wrote:
> 
> On Mon, 7 Feb 2000, H . J . Lu wrote:
> >
> > gdb 4.17.0.14 has one patch from Sam to deal with shared libraries.
> > People who want to debug shared libraries may not want to use gdb
> > in CVS. As you have mentioned above, it is not that unusual nowdays.
> > We have patches and they seem to work. We can make gdb 5.0 to work
> > with shared libraries. If we continue ignoring the working patches
> > without providing an alternative, we are sending the wrong signals
> > to those contributors.
> 
> BTW, does it seem reasonable to split gdb into enbedded and native
> editions ? It is all working more or less OK now, however, there is
> a lot of stuff of which is applicable to either of the two and in
> my view it is damaging new developments.

Hmm,

One of GDB's claims to fame is how it brings desk-top debugging features
to the embedded development environment.  A good example would be the
inferior function call.

If we looked at splitting GDB then I think that we would likely create a
situtation where the two versions could quickly diverge.  As it is, I
believe that GDB has gained far more than it has lost by being a
native/embedded debugger.  That extra pressure has ment that people are
forced to seek good architectural solutions rather than accept quick
hacks.

	enjoy,
		Andrew