From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-87542-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 3731 invoked by alias); 27 Jan 2012 09:41:35 -0000
Received: (qmail 3722 invoked by uid 22791); 27 Jan 2012 09:41:34 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.9 required=5.0	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB,SPF_SOFTFAIL
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from mtaout23.012.net.il (HELO mtaout23.012.net.il) (80.179.55.175)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 27 Jan 2012 09:41:21 +0000
Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout23.012.net.il by a-mtaout23.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0LYG00F00AT65300@a-mtaout23.012.net.il> for gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Fri, 27 Jan 2012 11:41:20 +0200 (IST)
Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([84.228.102.195]) by a-mtaout23.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0LYG00FOIAWU0R80@a-mtaout23.012.net.il>; Fri, 27 Jan 2012 11:41:19 +0200 (IST)
Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2012 10:02:00 -0000
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Subject: Re: GDB 7.4 --with-python doesn't like d:/foo/bar
In-reply-to: <20120127052515.GW31383@adacore.com>
To: Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com>
Cc: dje@google.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Message-id: <83fwf1zdq3.fsf@gnu.org>
References: <E1RqJbR-00068v-M2@fencepost.gnu.org> <20120127052515.GW31383@adacore.com>
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb-patches.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2012-01/txt/msg00939.txt.bz2

> Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2012 09:25:15 +0400
> From: Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com>
> Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, eliz@gnu.org
> 
> To me, the change would not be completely correct on Unix hosts,
> but I think that the chances of someone calling a local directory
> a single-letter followed by a colon are very small. So I think
> it's OK.

This is a standard way of Autoconf's catering to DOS and Windows
platforms.  You can see it at work elsewhere in the configure script,
because it's part of AC_PROG_PATH.  In fact, you can find it just a
few lines below the test that failed.

> I changed the expressions a bit replacing "[\\/]*" back into just "/"
> as originally used. Eli, would that still work for you?

Again, I think consistency with AC_PROG_PATH is better, even though a
case of a single backslash starting an absolute file name on Windows
is extremely rare.

Thanks.