From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org (eggs.gnu.org [IPv6:2001:470:142:3::10]) by server2.sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64EEE3877002 for ; Sat, 7 Mar 2020 17:45:38 +0000 (GMT) Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:41493) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1jAdW5-0001Ne-1u; Sat, 07 Mar 2020 12:45:37 -0500 Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=1455 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1jAdW4-00017r-3N; Sat, 07 Mar 2020 12:45:36 -0500 Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2020 19:45:34 +0200 Message-Id: <835zfg9hz5.fsf@gnu.org> From: Eli Zaretskii To: Simon Marchi Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org In-Reply-To: <4bd435cd-b06d-e0fc-70a9-9a8a18d73987@efficios.com> (message from Simon Marchi on Sat, 7 Mar 2020 11:51:08 -0500) Subject: Re: [PATCH] gdb: recognize 64 bits Windows executables as Cygwin osabi References: <20200307041742.31158-1-simon.marchi@efficios.com> <83zhcsa8my.fsf@gnu.org> <4bd435cd-b06d-e0fc-70a9-9a8a18d73987@efficios.com> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: gdb-patches@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2020 17:45:39 -0000 > Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org > From: Simon Marchi > Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2020 11:51:08 -0500 > > https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2020-03/msg00151.html > > Currently, loading the 64-bits .exe in a GNU/Linux-hosted GDB ends up calling > the svr4 libraries code, which is plain wrong. By using the Cygwin osabi, > at least the right shared libraries functions are used. > > I agree with what you suggest below, but I think that the current patch is > still a step forward and improves things. I agree. I just think we can do better. > So what we can do is add an "MS-Windows" osabi and make "Cygwin" and > "MS-Windows" functionally equivalent. Any "pei-i386" or "pei-x86-64" > executable would be detected as "MS-Windows". That's fine with me, and IMO will be more accurate than calling them all "Cygwin", since Cygwin programs are just a peculiar kind of Windows executables. > If we do such a change, I would like it to be done on top of the current > patch, as to not mix concerns. I'm okay with that, thanks.