Re: Changes

[Tom Tromey <tromey at redhat dot com>]

>>>>> "Thiago" == Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauerman@br.ibm.com> writes:

Tom> In particular I think Red Hat is not going to pursue Frysk's current
Tom> monitoring and tracing goals, or the existing GUI.

Thiago> Perhaps this can be left as a dormant goal, to be revisited when a
Thiago> working solution is at hand?

It is fine by me.  If someone wants to pick this up right away, that
is also fine -- this part was just more a statement of Red Hat's goals.

I am not sure that there is any infrastructure that would be useful to
a tracing task that would not also be useful to a debugger.  So, in
terms of the core, I could not think of anything that would need to be
different.  (If you know of something here, I'd like to hear it.)

So, this is more about what deliverables Red Hat wants, and what parts
of the tool Red Hat plans to work on.

Thiago> Nice. IMHO, starting from scratch again in C++ would be just more work
Thiago> at the end of the day... IMHO again the way to go is to reuse as much
Thiago> code as possible, including from GDB. The idea is to take the shortest
Thiago> path to a good working solution.

This particular decision has been bothering me all week.  And, I don't
really have an answer, or even a good process to arrive at an answer :(
I'll address that more in the roadmap email.

Tom> We may want a standalone debugger GUI.  One idea is to see if we can
Tom> reuse the Eclipse work using RCP.  Another idea is to go the gdb
Tom> route and hope some 3rd party either writes one, or ports and
Tom> existing one from gdb.

Thiago> So having a GUI separate from Eclipse is within the goal of
Thiago> the project?  Just not the existing one? Sorry, I'm not sure I
Thiago> understood this part.

Yeah, sorry.  It is confusing.

The current GUI does not align with our goals.

Red Hat may at some point want a standalone classic debugger GUI.
However, it isn't totally decided.  I probably should have simply left
this off the list.

Tom