From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13844 invoked by alias); 25 Apr 2005 04:25:48 -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 12235 invoked from network); 25 Apr 2005 04:24:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO cgf.cx) (66.30.17.189) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 25 Apr 2005 04:24:14 -0000 Received: by cgf.cx (Postfix, from userid 201) id 8102F13C0BA; Mon, 25 Apr 2005 00:24:14 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 04:25:00 -0000 From: Christopher Faylor To: Mark Mitchell , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: PATCH: Support Windows in event-loop.c Message-ID: <20050425042414.GA7322@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> Mail-Followup-To: Mark Mitchell , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <200504210549.j3L5n2nP027728@sirius.codesourcery.com> <01c546a1$Blat.v2.4$e03250c0@zahav.net.il> <4267F742.2090108@codesourcery.com> <01c546b0$Blat.v2.4$c193bb40@zahav.net.il> <20050421205617.GA13146@nevyn.them.org> <01c54713$Blat.v2.4$5d0b4ea0@zahav.net.il> <20050424221806.GA13942@nevyn.them.org> <426C3270.4050608@codesourcery.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <426C3270.4050608@codesourcery.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i X-SW-Source: 2005-04/txt/msg00304.txt.bz2 On Sun, Apr 24, 2005 at 04:57:36PM -0700, Mark Mitchell wrote: >Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: >>I guess I don't see this as a problem, while you do. In any case, >>since Chris has raised technical objections, I'm going to sit back and >>see what the next revision looks like. Hopefully it will make us both >>happier. > >I, too, am waiting on Chris' comments re. my justification for using >WaitForMultipleObjects. If it turns out that this is not the right >primitive to use, then we'll have to revisit that side of things, but I >suspect that the choice between directly modifying the file and >providing a (almost-certainly incomplete) implementation of "select" >will probably remain. Sorry. I didn't know you were waiting for any further feedback from me. Your last message implied that the only handle which ever makes it into a select call is a console handle. Is that right? I thought that it was also used for serial I/O and GDB/MI. cgf