Re: [RFA] Remote UDP support

[Andrew Cagney <ac131313 at cygnus dot com>]

> A patch for this feature was supported a year or so ago, but never went in. 

(lack of assignment the last time it was posted from memory).

> I had a need for this a couple of days ago, so I did it over from scratch;
> it's much easier now than it was at the time.  The name of ser-tcp.c is a
> bit wrong after this patch; I can either rename the file to ser-net.c or
> just update some comments to match.  Got a preference?  Otherwise OK?

 From memory, the last time this came up the conclusion was that:

- It isn't at all reliable (rather than mostly reliable as across TCP or 
serial).  The entire ``T'' stop packet can be lost and neither GDB, nor 
the target, would notice.

- it wasn't necessary - there are micro tcp implementations around that 
implement sufficient TCP for the remote protocol to work

Check the archives (search for mark salter?).

One theory put forward was to have GDB print a banner(6) sized warning 
(and get confirmation) before accepting the option.

Andrew