From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24860 invoked by alias); 21 Mar 2003 10:12:03 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 24826 invoked from network); 21 Mar 2003 10:12:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 21 Mar 2003 10:12:00 -0000 Received: from int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (nat-pool-rdu-dmz.redhat.com [172.16.52.200] (may be forged)) by mx1.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h2LABxQ01699 for ; Fri, 21 Mar 2003 05:12:00 -0500 Received: from potter.sfbay.redhat.com (potter.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.27.15]) by int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h2LABxQ13566 for ; Fri, 21 Mar 2003 05:11:59 -0500 Received: from cygbert.vinschen.de (vpn50-3.rdu.redhat.com [172.16.50.3]) by potter.sfbay.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h2LABv526489 for ; Fri, 21 Mar 2003 02:11:58 -0800 Received: (from corinna@localhost) by cygbert.vinschen.de (8.11.6/8.9.3/Linux sendmail 8.9.3) id h2LABtI31175 for gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com; Fri, 21 Mar 2003 11:11:55 +0100 Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2003 10:12:00 -0000 From: Corinna Vinschen To: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFA] i386-cygwin-tdep.c Message-ID: <20030321101154.GT21269@cygbert.vinschen.de> Reply-To: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Mail-Followup-To: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <20030320213708.GP21269@cygbert.vinschen.de> <86smthw0d1.fsf@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <86smthw0d1.fsf@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-SW-Source: 2003-03/txt/msg00451.txt.bz2 On Fri, Mar 21, 2003 at 10:11:06AM +0100, Mark Kettenis wrote: > Hmm, Interix also has a sniffer that detects pei-i386, so installing > this patch rules out having a GDB that supports. It would be great if > you could find a clever way to distinguish between the two. However, That would be cool but I have no access to Interix. > in the current state of affairs, with Interix not being in a working > state yet, this patch is fine. Could you add a comment in > i386_cygwin_osabi_sniffer that Interix also uses pei-i386 and that we > need a way to distinguish between the to? Consider a patch with that > change pre-approved. Thanks, I've added a comment and applied the patch. Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Cygwin Developer Red Hat, Inc. mailto:vinschen@redhat.com