This is the mail archive of the
frysk@sourceware.org
mailing list for the frysk project.
Re: C++ debugger mailing list
- From: Andrew Cagney <cagney at redhat dot com>
- To: Elena Zannoni <elena dot zannoni at oracle dot com>
- Cc: frysk <frysk at sources dot redhat dot com>
- Date: Tue, 08 Jul 2008 09:39:39 -0400
- Subject: Re: C++ debugger mailing list
- References: <486E887B.9020707@redhat.com> <48726570.6060902@oracle.com>
Elena Zannoni wrote:
Andrew Cagney wrote:
I'd like to propose that discussions and planning for this new
project (or rebooted frysk as some have called it) be on a dedicated
mailing list (it can be bootstrapped using frysk's membership), and
then we extend a hand to gdb@ developers inviting them to participate.
I think an invitation to interested gdb developers to something
clearly not frysk and not gdb, would be a strong symbolic gesture to
all concerned that the intent here is inclusion.
Andrew
Can somebody elaborate?
We'd like to participate in these ongoing discussions for the new
project, whatever that is.
The goal of the frysk project is to implement an allways on monitoring
and debugging tool, with key focus points being visual or graphical
interface, non-stop and saleability. And in particular, to not just
re-implement GDB. This drove decisions such as language choice and
architecture, directions and goals, and also the decision to start with
a relatively clean slate.
Red Hat have decided to withdraw their support for the frysk project and
its goals, and are now instead focusing their efforts on a more clearly
and narrowly defined goal of implement the Best C++ debugger, and in
C++. Tom is leading this new effort.
This of course leads us to a number of questions that I'm sure you're
too familiar with (having struggled with them at the start of the frysk
project):
-> do you start a new community around a new code base
-> do you fork an existing community and code base; GDB or frysk
-> do you work with an existing community, in particular GDB
A lot has changed over the last few years; for instance GOLD; GCC moving
to C++; and GDB's increased level of activity and functionality. An
evaluation of the above in light of this new environment, is important.
Finally, a mistake I must recognize with frysk was not trying to engage
the GDB community, and I look forward to seeing that mistake redressed
with this new effort; and that I guess is my motivation for proposing a
neutral discussion ground. Shall we set something up, gdb++ frysk++ ...?