From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5336 invoked by alias); 28 Mar 2010 18:48:12 -0000 Received: (qmail 5323 invoked by uid 22791); 28 Mar 2010 18:48:12 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SARE_MSGID_LONG40 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from ey-out-1920.google.com (HELO ey-out-1920.google.com) (74.125.78.146) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sun, 28 Mar 2010 18:48:07 +0000 Received: by ey-out-1920.google.com with SMTP id 4so981356eyg.24 for ; Sun, 28 Mar 2010 11:48:04 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.213.109.9 with HTTP; Sun, 28 Mar 2010 11:48:04 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20100328184323.GA32194@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> References: <647fe9b11003260354o53df5f0ayde8d1e3a03f1b694@mail.gmail.com> <20100326141655.GA23473@caradoc.them.org> <647fe9b11003260747i3156003fp642e9ed6ae74d7b5@mail.gmail.com> <647fe9b11003260824o4fb82825n22ca8cdf5da0f1e6@mail.gmail.com> <20100326153302.GI9310@caradoc.them.org> <20100328184323.GA32194@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> Date: Sun, 28 Mar 2010 18:48:00 -0000 Received: by 10.213.52.195 with SMTP id j3mr2014561ebg.33.1269802084762; Sun, 28 Mar 2010 11:48:04 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <647fe9b11003281148u489bb801oabb0c7bd6d4438e7@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH] winsock include fixes From: Ozkan Sezer To: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Cc: ktietz70@googlemail.com, Daniel Jacobowitz Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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: 2010-03/txt/msg00952.txt.bz2 On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 9:43 PM, Christopher Faylor wrote: > On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 11:33:02AM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: >>On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 05:24:23PM +0200, Ozkan Sezer wrote: >>> Indeed, adding winsock2.h include to serial.h does fix the >>> problems for mingw-w64, like the following: >> >>This change is OK. > > Isn't this really a problem with mingw-w64 rather than a gdb > problem? =A0It seems like this should be fixed there. > > cgf > I posted the fix to gdb, because I believe that it is a gdb problem. Can you explain how is it really supposed to be a mingw-w64 problem? -- Ozkan