Re: libtgdb or libgdb

[Bob Rossi <bob at brasko dot net>]

Well, I am not sure about the license. To me, thats not really a big
deal. It will defiantly be under the GPL, however, I don't know what to
do with the copyright.

Is there any advantage to making it GPL and keeping the copyright or 
making it LGPL and giving the copyright to the FSF?

Would either of those scenarios effect companies?

Thanks,
Bob Rossi

On Thu, Jul 17, 2003 at 11:35:17AM -0400, Alain Magloire wrote:
> > 
> > Was the Email below ignored because of bad timing ( 6.0 ) release?
> > 
> > Or because no one is interested in the idea? I find it very frustrating 
> > when there is not a single response.
> > 
> 
> 8-)
> 
> However, I did try a few times to reach the tgdb or cgdb list on sourceforge list to no avail.
> (Including personal emails).
> 
> The "problem"(or the advantage) with libgdb is the license.
> 
> What would be the license of such project ?
> 
> certainly would love to share my experience with MI and see the code evolve.
> 
> > Bob Rossi
> > 
> > On Thu, Jul 10, 2003 at 10:34:10PM -0400, Bob Rossi wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > > 
> > > As some of you may know, I am working on a front end to gdb called cgdb.
> > > In order to communicate with gdb, I wrote a library called libtgdb (
> > > Trivial gdb ). This gives a simple interface for the front end to work
> > > with. Thus, completely separating the gdb-specific code from the front
> > > end.
> > > 
> > > As of know, libtgdb supports annotate level 2 communication. Starting
> > > next month, I plan to add mi support. It can end up supporting annotate
> > > level 1 if necessary in the future.
> > > 
> > > Since I have been subscribed to the gdb list, I have seen many inquiries 
> > > about libgdb. Which seems to be no longer supported. I was thinking that
> > > it might be reasonable to have libtgdb be shipped with gdb's sources as
> > > a library that any front end can use to interface with gdb. Of course it
> > > would be as general purpose as possible, and capable of supporting all
> > > of gdb's features when complete.
> > > 
> > > One major difference between libtgdb and libgdb is that
> > >    1. libtgdb is a separate library, not linked against gdb's sources.
> > >    2. libtgdb does not have to be compiled to work with a single gdb, 
> > >    it is backwards compatible and will work with any gdb.
> > > 
> > > What does everyone think? Does this make any sense? Is this too ambitious?
> > > 
> > > My main goal, is too make front end's able to integrate with gdb easily.
> > > I have spent *far* to much time trying to figure out the gdb specific
> > > stuff. It just doesn't make sense reproducing the code in all of the
> > > front ends. They all end up having there own bugs, which is *very* annoying.
> > > In general, the quality of front ends could be improved, if developers
> > > were not trying to figure out the tricks of getting gdb to do certain
> > > things.
> > > 
> > > Thanks,
> > > Bob Rossi
> > 
> 
> 
> -- 
> au revoir, alain
> ----
> Aussi haut que l'on soit assis, on est toujours assis que sur son cul !!!