On Mon, Mar 22, 2004 at 06:33:03PM -0800, Marcel Moolenaar wrote: > On Mon, Mar 22, 2004 at 05:18:53PM -0800, Julian Elischer wrote: > > > > project expressd interest > > ---------------------------------------------- > > TLS/toolchain alfred, marcel, myself > > A couple of things come together: > o gdb upgrade > o New kdb framework > o TLS support + debugging > o Thread debugging I still haven't seen any plan or commitment for LTS and GDB. Other than pushing me to spend my time importing a new binutils (which is broken for sparc64). If I import a new binutils, you need a new GCC to take full advantage of it. After GCC 3.4 is imported, what *commitments* are people willing to make to carry it farther? What will that work entail? Note that ANYONE that hacks on our GDB should have FSF paperwork on file. We HAVE to get out of the mess of all of our local hacks. The reason ports/devel/gdb6 still isn't active is the mess of bringing our GDB 5.2 hacks forward to GDB 6.1. I've had a WIP for a while, but it is really painful because we haven't done any due diligence in getting our needs taken care of in stock FSF GDB. That hasn't been able to happen to date because the people that made many of our GDB commits wouldn't file FSF paperwork. :-(Received on Tue Mar 23 2004 - 07:12:09 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:37:48 UTC