This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sourceware.org mailing list for the GDB project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
Mark Wielaard wrote: > On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 10:38:31AM +0100, Jan Kratochvil wrote: > > On Tue, 14 Feb 2012 10:33:45 +0100, Mark Wielaard wrote: > > > I think you should keep the historical information about older > > > versions and add precisely which symbols weren't included with > > > version 5 that are now included with version 6 in the > > > documentation of the gdb index format. That will be helpful for > > > other producers and consumers of the .gdb_index section > > > (elfutils/binutils readelf, gold --gdb-index option). > > > > So far GDB sources kept only documentation from the recognized > > formats. Such change would have to be done retroactively. > > > > I do not think it makes sense to give much energy to deal with > > older formats, > > I am not suggesting to retroactive add more info on never documented > versions, just to not remove existing documentation of the old > versions. Version 4, 5 and 6 are all compatible to a consumer, > having that documented is a good thing IMHO. Just having one extra > line to document which symbols have been added in version 6 will > also help other producers like gold --gdb-index. I can see the value in not removing existing documentation, but every way I arranged it seemed more confusing than simply stating that the previous formats were obsolete. I've attached an alternate version of the doc part of the patch with the information retained. I don't really like it, but if other people think it valuable I won't make a fuss. Cheers, Gary -- http://gbenson.net/
Attachment:
different-doc-patch
Description: Text document
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |