From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24232 invoked by alias); 10 Feb 2006 16:49:47 -0000 Received: (qmail 24221 invoked by uid 22791); 10 Feb 2006 16:49:46 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from nevyn.them.org (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31.1) with ESMTP; Fri, 10 Feb 2006 16:49:44 +0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.54) id 1F7bSo-0006rg-CC for gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Fri, 10 Feb 2006 11:49:42 -0500 Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2006 16:49:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: RFA: Support Windows extended error numbers in safe_strerror Message-ID: <20060210164942.GA26364@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <20060203215455.GA3501@nevyn.them.org> <20060206173550.GB22947@nevyn.them.org> <200602062254.k16MsagK009925@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <20060206225829.GA31895@nevyn.them.org> <20060208000855.GA5040@nevyn.them.org> <200602082107.k18L7xRh013417@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <20060209223719.GA3865@nevyn.them.org> <20060210161800.GC2235@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060210161800.GC2235@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i 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/msg00248.txt.bz2 On Fri, Feb 10, 2006 at 11:18:00AM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote: > On Fri, Feb 10, 2006 at 09:53:10AM +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > >> Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2006 17:37:19 -0500 > >> From: Daniel Jacobowitz > >> > >> Anyway, here's a patch updated in every way I can think of to make it > >> less upsetting. Is this really better? Select to follow in the proper > >> thread. > > > >I'm fine with this, if this is the best compromise we can reach. > > I'm wondering if a top-level "mingw" directory might simplify things here? > Could most of the Windows accommodations be put in an "external" library > and an external header file and just have gdb point to that? I spoke with Chris about this a bit, offline; my general feeling is that (for reasons previously discussed) this wouldn't help. For instance we'd have to find some other way than knowing how handles had been created to figure out how to properly select on them. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery