Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2015 14:52:07 -0700 From: Bryan Drewery <bdrewery@FreeBSD.org> To: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org>, 'freebsd-arch' <freebsd-arch@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Retiring in-tree GDB Message-ID: <5626B787.1020502@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <5626B4C9.6020307@FreeBSD.org> References: <2678091.es0AGJQ0Ou@ralph.baldwin.cx> <5626B15C.4080408@FreeBSD.org> <5626B4C9.6020307@FreeBSD.org>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
[-- Attachment #1 --] On 10/20/2015 2:40 PM, Bryan Drewery wrote: > On 10/20/2015 2:25 PM, Bryan Drewery wrote: >> On 10/20/2015 1:36 PM, John Baldwin wrote: >>> However, I would like to propose that we retire the in-tree GDB for some of >>> our platforms (namely x86) for 11. In particular, I think we should default >> >> Disabling/removing gdb. Definitely. It is unusable in many cases and the >> working gdb is just a 'pkg install' away. >> >>> to enabling lldb and disabling gdb for platforms that meet the following >> >> Why should we include lldb in the base system? It is not needed to build >> or use the system and we can easily provide one from packages. >> >> Arguments about providing a default working system don't work here for >> me as we don't provide perl, python, valgrind, vim, emacs, X11, etc. We >> can provide lldb and gdb on the default DVD though. >> >> If we are actually going to "package base" in 11, we should not be >> adding new things into base that can easily live in ports. Yes, I know >> lldb is already there but I don't think it should be. >> >> Can the same be said for tools such as truss, ktrace or nvi? Sure. The >> discussion is really "what packages should be installed by default". >> The answer should be "what all, or most, users _need_" Do most users >> need a debugger? I don't think so. >> >>> criteria: >>> >>> 1) devel/gdb works including thread and kgdb support >>> 2) lldb works >> >> > > Other things to consider is that this increases build time for a tool > that only developers need. Given it is not a drop-in replacement for > gdb, a tool that people have become accustomed to over several decades, > the bar for adding it into the base system should be higher. > In private discussions it was pointed out we don't have reliable packages for tier 2 architectures. That is a very valid point. I just ask that we try to shift our mindset to "pkg install" where possible. -- Regards, Bryan Drewery [-- Attachment #2 --] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJWJreHAAoJEDXXcbtuRpfPKGgH/iCgP3cp4gaJtWDN3v6djWts 5KzmP8zO8+elUgtWpEsae/cqJc6fnhCMAYnqY2oqtDSBnaMo0ClhBtN+7k6Xje9g w9cW1Bqtaj58VgWe/wRZkaZ+LOiM2DHqnxg2zVg2iHyX9kB0ZSYBVKjFvaTiUI7s iMuQpyqcgmHD6STW0yCBA+uBcwL8j2X7fiFHWjTfojJLkZfHmOaQTqC8Emk211rJ Z90DNpqNpabOO7YGpMJDocCX4dcZ5YFRP4n44GtuzsBO/M9F16PnowfO1rq+1z2I CkiEj4tJ5lQo1L6u2p7iwqm+weOCRaEmfcA31u0YPt9WojqRfIRVi/ZQ7iY7zNw= =UCAw -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----home | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5626B787.1020502>