Re: [patch] Minor O_CLOEXEC optimization, "regression" fix

[Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com>]

On Wed, 09 Oct 2013 19:58:12 +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> Then why did you ask this upthread:
> 
> > May one rely on MS-Windows fopen("","re") will fail with EINVAL if it fails
> > because of the "e" flag, Kai?  It is in GDB function gdb_fopen_cloexec.
> 
> ?  That's what confused me.  Sorry if I missed something.

I did not realize / expect O_CLOEXEC is 0 on MS-Windows.  Also MS-Windows has
many build platforms like MinGW, Cygwin, ActiveState(?), 32 vs. 64 bit, native
vs. cross, there exist various sets of include files either original or stolen
by dirty room / clean room approaches, so when we talk about "MS-Windows" here
do not believe we cover all the possible ways how to build MS-Windows hosted
GDB.

Also I do not believe that every platform not supporting "e" has to return
EINVAL for it, some platform could IMO return a different error code, relying
on EINVAL for "e" is IMO not cross-platform compatible enough.

But whenever I try to build GDB on a non-Linux platform it fails for me anyway
so I do not much believe in the claimed and attempted wide platform
compatibility of GDB.  Therefore I found it fine to make the code simpler and
more optimal on GNU/Linux when there is an agreement from other maintainer(s).


Regards,
Jan