From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 1109 invoked by alias); 5 Feb 2006 22:33:54 -0000 Received: (qmail 1087 invoked by uid 22791); 5 Feb 2006 22:33:53 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from cgf.cx (HELO cgf.cx) (24.61.23.223) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Sun, 05 Feb 2006 22:33:53 +0000 Received: by cgf.cx (Postfix, from userid 201) id 7F4B713C0F8; Sun, 5 Feb 2006 17:33:51 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 05 Feb 2006 22:33:00 -0000 From: Christopher Faylor To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: RFA: Support Windows extended error numbers in safe_strerror Message-ID: <20060205223351.GF4718@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> Mail-Followup-To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <20060204032730.GB9890@nevyn.them.org> <200602041435.k14EZ6NK016329@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <20060205001503.GB8728@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> <20060205193440.GB4718@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> <20060205202222.GB5574@nevyn.them.org> <20060205215036.GE4718@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> <20060205215659.GA7232@nevyn.them.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060205215659.GA7232@nevyn.them.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-02/txt/msg00107.txt.bz2 On Sun, Feb 05, 2006 at 04:56:59PM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: >On Sun, Feb 05, 2006 at 04:50:36PM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote: >>On Sun, Feb 05, 2006 at 03:22:22PM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: >>>On Sun, Feb 05, 2006 at 10:19:12PM +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >>>>>The shell is needed for the "shell" command. The shell is not used for >>>>>running programs. >>>> >>>>The latter is unlike on Posix platforms, right? >>> >>>That is an implementation artifact that, IMO, we desperately need to >>>move away from. It's a continual source of trouble from e.g. >>>unexpected variable settings in shell initialization files, and it's an >>>aggravating (to me) external dependency for GDB. >> >>I did try to implement this artifact in Cygwin once but I never got it >>right. >> >>Isn't the shell used to allow redirection and shell-like quoting from >>the gdb command-line? Lack of redirection, at least, is an occasional >>complaint about gdb-under-cygwin. > >That's right; and we certainly can't ditch that support. But what we >do today is pass the command line arguments directly to a shell, which >means all sorts of worrying about quoting, and also means that we get >Bourne shell behavior if the user has an appropriate $SHELL, or C shell >if they're using csh/tcsh, et cetera. I don't know if anyone takes >advantage of that as a feature, but it's sure confusing! > >I keep telling myself we ought to somehow get rid of this, but I'm >fuzzy on the details. I'm feeling deja vu here. I suspect that we've probably discussed this before. :-) If so, I probably said something like "Maybe we could just standardize on /bin/bash quoting and redirection rules and put a shell-like command parser in gdb." cgf