From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25362 invoked by alias); 24 Oct 2012 14:57:05 -0000 Received: (qmail 25353 invoked by uid 22791); 24 Oct 2012 14:57:05 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-8.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 24 Oct 2012 14:56:59 +0000 Received: from int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q9OEuvDq018812 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 24 Oct 2012 10:56:57 -0400 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.11]) by int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q9OEusdH002117; Wed, 24 Oct 2012 10:56:55 -0400 Message-ID: <508801B4.7060608@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 14:57:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:16.0) Gecko/20121016 Thunderbird/16.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Joel Brobecker CC: Pedro Alves , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: Checked in: [RFA/commit/Windows] run program with space in path to exe. References: <1350692925-14181-1-git-send-email-brobecker@adacore.com> <83happzi44.fsf@gnu.org> <20121020162936.GC3050@adacore.com> <83a9vhdpth.fsf@gnu.org> <20121024134243.GH3555@adacore.com> <5087FC78.8010904@redhat.com> <20121024144521.GI3555@adacore.com> In-Reply-To: <20121024144521.GI3555@adacore.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2012-10/txt/msg00448.txt.bz2 On 10/24/2012 03:45 PM, Joel Brobecker wrote: >> Doesn't gdbserver need the same treatment? > > It doesn't, because it provides the "image name" in addition to the > command line. Ah. The "image name" is a mandatory argument on Windows CE, not optional. Are you saying that that would be an alternative fix for gdb? Or is there a downside? (Wondering in the sake of convergence in the code bases.) > Although, now that I look at the code, there might > be a different bug. The program is going to start fine, but I am guessing > that argc/argv is going to be miscomputed. I'll put it on my list... Thanks. -- Pedro Alves