This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: Remote Debugging Protocol - hex case
- From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at false dot org>
- To: Tim Auton <tim dot auton at uton dot org>
- Cc: gdb-patches at sourceware dot org
- Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 17:49:21 -0500
- Subject: Re: Remote Debugging Protocol - hex case
- References: <842A2789-AFD7-4339-8E5E-608D6C9CFDD7@uton.org>
On Tue, Feb 13, 2007 at 09:45:41PM +0000, Tim Auton wrote:
> As far as I can see, making remote debugging support upper-case hex
> properly won't be much trouble. It pretty much amounts to replacing the
> disparate error checking in remote.c with calls to
> packet_check_result(). But it's quite possible that I'm missing wider
> repercussions which are obvious to someone who knows GDB and the source
> much better than me (which is probably most of you).
As far as I know, you are correct - it's just a matter of cleanup.
The "more correct" functions you mention are much newer, and it's hard
to test some of the older bits of the file - that's why not much has
happened.
> 1) Patch remote.c to support upper-case hex consistently, update docs to
> suggest lower-case for backward compatibility.
>
> Pros: Consistent with the rest of GDB, which generally supports
> upper-case hex.
>
> Cons: Any stubs which don't provide a two-digit errno or a
> E.something
> string will break. (Do any exist?)
I think they are sufficiently broken that we should not bend over
backwards to support them (though recognizing "ENN" as an error might
be useful - a recent PR was at least the second time I've seen someone
do that.)
> I'm happy to write and submit the patches once the maintainers decide on
> the best course of action, though as I'm not intimate with GDB's
> internals and don't (yet) have the first clue about texinfo (but am
> wiling to learn), the maintainers may wish to be more circumspect than
> ususal in checking them. I've found the GNU coding standards, but
> pointers to anything else relevant would be well received (off-list, if
> appropriate).
That, and the list archives, should be fine as references. I'd be
glad to review patches in this area. Please note that this would be
non-trivial work, so it would require an FSF copyright assignment for
GDB - let me know if you're able and willing to do that (or have one
already).
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery