Re: gdb and jtag

["William A. Gatliff" <bgat at billgatliff dot com>]

Doug:


On Tue, Nov 05, 2002 at 08:09:33AM -0800, Doug Evans wrote:
> 
> That's certainly another way to go.
> Question: Why choose one over the other?
> 
> Futzing with gdb sources means gdb is talking directly to
> the board and therefore is much easier to debug (when things aren't
> working) (and by "debug" here I mean debug the gdb/target connection).

Note that I've never used rproxy, but it's On My List Of Things To Get
To (tm).

The main reason I find the rproxy approach appealing is because it
doesn't tie you to a particular version of gdb.  I know that gdb
internals have been stable for some time, as has the RSP, but I *hate*
patching the stock GNU sources because then I have a one-off that *I*
have to distribute and keep up to date while the gdb developers charge
relentlessly into the future, or wherever they're headed.  :^)

The rproxy code base is smaller, I'd rather deal with the headache of
keeping *that* up to date.  And I like the "distributed" nature of
rproxy, since I don't always run under Linux (ditto for a lot of the
people I work with).

OT, but that's one of the reasons I like BDI2000's even though they're
so darned expensive (but worth it): they talk to the plain vanilla gdb.


Cheers,


b.g.
-- 
Bill Gatliff
Real embedded GNU and embedded Linux training is available.
See http://billgatliff.com for details.

------
Want more information?  See the CrossGCC FAQ, http://www.objsw.com/CrossGCC/
Want to unsubscribe? Send a note to crossgcc-unsubscribe@sources.redhat.com