RE: [cdt-dev] FW: Fixing some Debug feature-parity bugs

[John Cortell <rat042@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I updated the TWIKI page--removed that bug and signed myself up for 
another one (the eventpoints one).

John

At 07:58 PM 2/18/2010, Marc Khouzam wrote:
> Hi John,
>
> I totally agree that anything that CDI-GDB does not do, should not 
> be part of the feature parity effort.
> I hope we can quickly get to those bugs eventually, but for this 
> effort, let's keep things to the essentials.
>
> Thanks
>
> Marc
>
> ________________________________
> From: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On 
> Behalf Of John Cortell [rat042@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: February 18, 2010 7:17 PM
> To: CDT General developers list.; 'CDT General developers list.'
> Subject: Re: [cdt-dev] FW: Fixing some Debug feature-parity bugs
>
> Marc,
>
>    https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=248595
>
> is a CDI vs DSF parity bug I signed up for. I'm not sure it really 
> is a parity issue, since the CDI solution
>
>    https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=294874
>
> never got committed. While this is an important capability, I don't 
> think we should be including it in the "parity" effort since it 
> really does not constitute a hurdle in adopting DSF-GDB as the 
> default debugger over CDI-GDB.
>
> John
> _______________________________________________
> cdt-dev mailing list
> cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev