Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2015 14:40:25 -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: <5626B4C9.6020307@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <5626B15C.4080408@FreeBSD.org> References: <2678091.es0AGJQ0Ou@ralph.baldwin.cx> <5626B15C.4080408@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --J151PFmtGTMKNXgkwHL9lssRdKV494mIJ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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 so= me of >> our platforms (namely x86) for 11. In particular, I think we should d= efault >=20 > Disabling/removing gdb. Definitely. It is unusable in many cases and th= e > working gdb is just a 'pkg install' away. >=20 >> to enabling lldb and disabling gdb for platforms that meet the followi= ng >=20 > Why should we include lldb in the base system? It is not needed to buil= d > or use the system and we can easily provide one from packages. >=20 > 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. W= e > can provide lldb and gdb on the default DVD though. >=20 > 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. >=20 > 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. >=20 >> criteria: >> >> 1) devel/gdb works including thread and kgdb support >> 2) lldb works >=20 >=20 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. --=20 Regards, Bryan Drewery --J151PFmtGTMKNXgkwHL9lssRdKV494mIJ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJWJrTJAAoJEDXXcbtuRpfPuekIAIZnQcGZj5TxGRMBlTn76eu6 1KyofZtHx4vMh6WhxxEGiJCryPlYAjuPmd7ABxnAOmlv6v56yaB1Mx/qN5rnMdDb gV6TlvlhQlZv/tQQze7iwoE+p8jQe6MlbmSM02F0dbKk2D2JwRixrHQ7nCsDGDv7 LU7wfE+D8R1yMSFE21+kJQ3oP+3eDK70hqItu+PAcBORziCZ9DGjzn9xz3J3koJP nnWtrkI9NtMT5/F3x7kZxAs+t1d1QAmdrNMhDjG3O+ZxdHN9RYgig8VkI5oGTx9C DzQcd7lwEMS5g6IcTkU0MPJ5uHG4xLfJQUAYfF7IKBBwqNf/5rpU+Rc8maLjQ0E= =hnlV -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --J151PFmtGTMKNXgkwHL9lssRdKV494mIJ--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5626B4C9.6020307>