From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Apr 15 13:59:22 2014
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 71678704;
 Tue, 15 Apr 2014 13:59:22 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from bigwig.baldwin.cx (bigwig.baldwin.cx [IPv6:2001:470:1f11:75::1])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (Client did not present a certificate)
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 48F751D4C;
 Tue, 15 Apr 2014 13:59:22 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from jhbbsd.localnet (unknown [209.249.190.124])
 by bigwig.baldwin.cx (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 65EA5B924;
 Tue, 15 Apr 2014 09:59:20 -0400 (EDT)
From: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org>
To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Time for turning off gdb by default? Or worse...
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 09:31:24 -0400
User-Agent: KMail/1.13.5 (FreeBSD/8.4-CBSD-20130906; KDE/4.5.5; amd64; ; )
References: <DD38131E-9A43-4EFA-A27D-ED6B64F6A35A@bsdimp.com>
 <53489BBA.2040802@freebsd.org>
 <CAGE5yCo45GvjZQyQdi_h6-8ZvmG0VSsjyWqOr9_z7wwnXZeJ0w@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAGE5yCo45GvjZQyQdi_h6-8ZvmG0VSsjyWqOr9_z7wwnXZeJ0w@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <201404150931.24460.jhb@freebsd.org>
X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7
 (bigwig.baldwin.cx); Tue, 15 Apr 2014 09:59:20 -0400 (EDT)
Cc: Ed Maste <emaste@freebsd.org>
X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture <freebsd-arch.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-arch>,
 <mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arch/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
 <mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 13:59:22 -0000

On Friday, April 11, 2014 10:14:07 pm Peter Wemm wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 6:49 PM, Julian Elischer <julian@freebsd.org> wrote:
> > On 4/12/14, 4:35 AM, Ed Maste wrote:
> >>
> >> On 11 April 2014 14:26, Julian Elischer <julian@freebsd.org>
> >>>
> >>> bleagh!
> >>>
> >>> compare with ddd..
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> http://img.brothersoft.com/screenshots/softimage/d/data_display_debugger_for_mac-203841-1231223624.jpeg
> >>>
> >>> https://www.gnu.org/software/ddd/   for more examples
> >>
> >> I'm not sure how that's relevant; we're not contemplating putting that
> >> in the base system.
> >>
> > I'm suggestng that it's another way where gdb has features that lldb
> > doesn't. A plethora of front-ends.
> 
> Maybe, but that's not the question here.  The curses front end was a
> distraction.
> 
> The issue was:
> Given that the in-tree gdb is woefully stale and increasingly
> difficult to use with our current toolchain, is it time to turn it off
> and put our weight behind the ports version?  If so, what would we
> have to take care of or  bring over to the port version before we
> could?
> 
> The consensus seems to be that the loss of kgdb functionality would be
> a blocker.
> 
> Front ends for debuggers are way out of scope of the original question.

It would be relevant if the answer were to ditch gdb entirely and depend on
a kernel front-end for lldb for all kernel debugging (which is not an
unreasonable assumption to make given what we've done with the compiler).

-- 
John Baldwin