From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21675 invoked by alias); 20 Jun 2006 23:35:23 -0000 Received: (qmail 21657 invoked from network); 20 Jun 2006 23:35:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (195.23.133.218) by sourceware.org with QMTP; 20 Jun 2006 23:35:17 -0000 Received: (qmail 3939 invoked from network); 20 Jun 2006 23:35:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailfrt08.isp.novis.pt) ([195.23.133.200]) (envelope-sender ) by mailrly08.isp.novis.pt with compressed SMTP; 20 Jun 2006 23:35:16 -0000 Received: (qmail 31107 invoked from network); 20 Jun 2006 23:35:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mamas-laptop) ([195.23.225.239]) (envelope-sender ) by mailfrt08.isp.novis.pt with SMTP; 20 Jun 2006 23:35:15 -0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]) by mamas-laptop with esmtp (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id J16MUQ-000548-2L; Wed, 21 Jun 2006 00:35:14 +0100 Message-ID: <44988631.3010606@portugalmail.pt> Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 23:35:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (Windows/20060516) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org CC: drow@false.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Windows CE support update. References: <44969E63.9050208@portugalmail.pt> <20060620200901.GA28807@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> <20060620201214.GA1278@nevyn.them.org> In-Reply-To: <20060620201214.GA1278@nevyn.them.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0625-3, 20-06-2006), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean 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: 2006-06/txt/msg00298.txt.bz2 Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > On Tue, Jun 20, 2006 at 04:09:01PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote: > >> Also, I really don't want to pollute the win32-nat.c file with CE >> accommodations. That would again make me the de facto maintainer of >> Windows CE - a role from which which I've previously abdicated. >> >> So, thanks very much for the patch. It was obviously a lot of work but >> I really don't want to do things this way. >> > > I thoroughly agree. > > Pedro, if you are motivated to work on this - obviously we'd understand > if you'd rather just use what you've got - I'd be happy to discuss any > improvements to the remote protocol that you needed. > > Thanks, but I will pass on this for now. I hope I will get back to this, I sure had fun hacking gdb, but, since free time is limited, I will shift my priorities. Anyway, for reference, can you point to any gdbserver/remote stub effort for win32 (other than gdbproxy)? There doesn't seem to be anything of the sort in gdb/ Cheers, Pedro Alves