From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ben Elliston <bje@redhat.com>
To: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@cygnus.com>
Cc: Keith Seitz <keiths@cygnus.com>, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@is.elta.co.il>, Mark Kettenis <kettenis@science.uva.nl>, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [RFC] sigsetjmp/siglongjmp on cygwin
Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2001 15:49:00 -0000
Message-id: <15223.1933.710748.364749@scooby.brisbane.redhat.com>
References: <Pine.GSO.4.33.0108011357170.26158-100000@makita.cygnus.com> <3B738C62.6090607@cygnus.com>
X-SW-Source: 2001-08/msg00133.html

>>>>> "Andrew" == Andrew Cagney <ac131313@cygnus.com> writes:

  Andrew> Since you know a thing or two about autoconf 
  Andrew> ( http://sources.redhat.com/autobook/ ;-) would you mind giving an 
  Andrew> opinion on the below.

  Andrew> The full thread is at:
  Andrew> http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/2001-08/msg00012.html

I can see the arguments from both sides -- localise the warts to
configure.in or push them out into the platform-specific file.

One must keep in mind the traditional approach used by Autoconf for
situations like this: write a test that *detects* whether
sig{set,long}jmp are broken.

The current proposals suffer the problem that GDB and Cygwin versions
will have to follow in lock-step because GDB's configury will assume
that sig{set,long}jmp is either present or absent for Cygwin hosts.
This will not be true once (if?) Cygwin is fixed and there are two
"strains" :-) out there -- those that are fixed and those that are
not.

Ben