This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: Remote Debugging Protocol - hex case
On 13 Feb 2007, at 22:49, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
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.
OK, I'll have a good look at the testing framework and see what's
there at
present.
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.)
Can I take it that means option 1 looks most desirable?
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).
I don't have one, but FSF copyright assignment is no problem to me and
there's no legal impediment. I presume you'll let me know exactly what
I need to do to sort the papers out.
Tim