From owner-freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Tue Oct 20 22:27:22 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA5CEA1A57C for ; Tue, 20 Oct 2015 22:27:22 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from slw@zxy.spb.ru) Received: from zxy.spb.ru (zxy.spb.ru [195.70.199.98]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 98189A4A; Tue, 20 Oct 2015 22:27:22 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from slw@zxy.spb.ru) Received: from slw by zxy.spb.ru with local (Exim 4.84 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1ZofNI-0009zt-F1; Wed, 21 Oct 2015 01:27:20 +0300 Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2015 01:27:20 +0300 From: Slawa Olhovchenkov To: Bryan Drewery Cc: John Baldwin , 'freebsd-arch' Subject: Re: Retiring in-tree GDB Message-ID: <20151020222720.GA6469@zxy.spb.ru> References: <2678091.es0AGJQ0Ou@ralph.baldwin.cx> <5626B15C.4080408@FreeBSD.org> <20151020215008.GH42243@zxy.spb.ru> <5626BCB6.3000202@FreeBSD.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5626BCB6.3000202@FreeBSD.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: slw@zxy.spb.ru X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on zxy.spb.ru); SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2015 22:27:22 -0000 On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 03:14:14PM -0700, Bryan Drewery wrote: > On 10/20/2015 2:50 PM, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 02:25:48PM -0700, 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. > > > > When you need debuger you may don't have way to install it. > > > > How did you get a system? > > DVD? 'pkg add /mnt/cd/packages/gdb.txz' > Network? 'pkg install gdb' > > Fetching the packages to a USB drive from another system works too using > 'pkg fetch -o'. You talk about healty system. System may be semi-broken and need some assistance to r/w mount, for example.