HP Releases gdb-derived Debugger
Lumpish Scholar writes "Rather than only enhance their
proprietary debugger(s), Hewlett-Packard has started distributing "wdb" ("Wildebeest"),
an enhanced (and still free / Open Source, naturally) version
of the GNU debugger that supports HP's C, C++, and Fortran
compilers under HP-UX. They're not just giving it away; they're
supporting it for their customers with compiler support.
"
I had the misfortune of doing some development on an HP-UX workstation for a couple of months using HP's standard debugger (forget what it was called - adb? adx?). That thing sucked rocks. gdb rules and for those who develop under HP-UX, I am sure this is welcome news.
XEmacs and GDB are my two best friends. :)
I thought it was pretty apparent that the original poster was referring to public perception associated with one term or the other. The next sentence, that you missed quoting was: "Almost everybody agrees on that, and you can't change their mind."
The programs being described here are as buggy, unsupported
Whether to use one term or the other is kind of a question of integrity vs. marketing. It's like the Hacker vs. Cracker argument. Some say it's easier to just use a different term when a word is co-opted. Some say it's worth fighting for (in other words, winning the meaning of the word back for yourself)
They're not just giving it away; they're supporting it for their customers with compiler support. What does this mean?
It means if you've paid for a license to use HP's compilers, they'll give you support for wdb too.
In the proprietary UNIX world, the license for the OS typically does not include a license for the compilers (or at least for useful versions of the compilers.) Those are sold separately.
I used WDB 0.75 on HP-UX a year ago. It is their new strategic source level debugger.
--
Marc A. Lepage
Software Developer
ddd is pretty but I prefer debuggers that crash less frequently than my program (it's the reason I've sworn off Windows programming unless I'm getting paid. :-) )
Daniel
Hurry up and jump on the individualist bandwagon!
The One True Debugger (or meta-debugger, if you prefer; or debugger GUI) is still DDD.
;-)
If wdb runs underneath DDD (like gdb, pdb, pydb, jdb, and dbx do) then it rules. If not, it sucks. End of story.
Seriously though, DDD is the greatest programming tool ever created. Well, it's tied with XEmacs. Anyone who bags on *nix/*BSD for having crappy IDEs hasn't used these two tools properly.
Remember that what's inside of you doesn't matter because nobody can see it.
Taking into account that this wdb change is indeed at least a year old by now, I wonder whether they have already decided about their next strategic debugger...
--
Linux user since early January 1992.
I am getting tired of seeing the editor refer to free software as Open Source/free or free-OSS or some similar permution. Decorating the term "free software" with other gratutous modifiers is tedious and concusing. Which is is slashdot? Free Software or Open Source?
This came up on the HPUX-DEVTOOLS mailing list. HP will not support DDD, or the emacs interface wrapper around gdb/wdb. On the other hand, the HP developers use both interfaces, and will be the first to be disappointed if they break.
The DDD folks have deprecated their support of xdb, HP's older debugger.
Stupid job ads, weird spam, occasional insight at
ftp://ftp.hp.com/pub/lang/tools/WDB
has a registration-free download area.
later support WDB just like any GDB flavour.
I have not used WDB and DDD so far. But there
have been no WDB-related complaints so far
on the DDD mailing lists, so WDB and DDD seem
to work just fine.
No comments on WDB 1.0 yet, but there
is no reason this new release should
not work too.
It's been available with HP's compilers since 11.0 came out, circa Nov. 97... no new news here.
it is offensive to call gnu projects open source
They're not just giving it away; they're supporting it for their customers with compiler support.
What does this mean?
I will, however, register my vote for "Free Software" when it is necesary to choose.
It means if you run HPUX and their C compiler, and have a problem with their version of the GNU debugger, they'll support it, instead of saying "It's not supported."
This is probably a major trend. The well established vendors offering Open source and propriatary at the same time. This is a real opportunity for GNU etc to win on technical merits
Help fight continental drift.
See the DDD FAQ for a discussion of DDD's stability. Basically, DDD in itself is very stable, but relies on a large number of (possibly unstable) components. LessTif's stability is at a tolerable level (and increasing); if your mileage varies, feel free to use a DDD binary linked with OSF/Motif.