From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-67624-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 26060 invoked by alias); 12 Oct 2009 20:28:55 -0000
Received: (qmail 26052 invoked by uid 22791); 12 Oct 2009 20:28:55 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.8 required=5.0 	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_JMF_BR,SPF_SOFTFAIL
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from mtaout7.012.net.il (HELO mtaout7.012.net.il) (84.95.2.19)     by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 12 Oct 2009 20:28:49 +0000
Received: from conversion-daemon.i-mtaout7.012.net.il by i-mtaout7.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0KRF00L004L1NW00@i-mtaout7.012.net.il> for gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Mon, 12 Oct 2009 22:28:47 +0200 (IST)
Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([87.70.84.229]) by i-mtaout7.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0KRF00CRH4VWAB70@i-mtaout7.012.net.il>; Mon, 12 Oct 2009 22:28:45 +0200 (IST)
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 20:28:00 -0000
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Subject: Re: shared lib dos filename style - one more question
In-reply-to: <1255378026.10921.251.camel@pavilion>
To: danny.backx@scarlet.be
Cc: brobecker@adacore.com, drow@false.org, gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Message-id: <83ococicct.fsf@gnu.org>
References: <1253973110.10921.76.camel@pavilion> <1254946075.10921.178.camel@pavilion> <20091007201145.GA21557@caradoc.them.org> <1255017831.10921.197.camel@pavilion> <20091009173650.GB5272@adacore.com> <1255114781.10921.217.camel@pavilion> <20091010021849.GC5272@adacore.com> <1255378026.10921.251.camel@pavilion>
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: 2009-10/txt/msg00247.txt.bz2

> From: Danny Backx <danny.backx@scarlet.be>
> Cc: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>,         gdb-patches <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
> Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 22:07:06 +0200
> 
> What should unixify() do ?
> 1.  /path/to/a -> /path/to/a
> 2.  \path/to/a -> /path/to/a
> 3.  \path\to\a -> /path/to/a
> 4.  c: -> .
> 5.  c:\path\to\a -> /path/to/a

If unixify is supposed to support Windows file semantics, then the
last 2 cases are incorrect, IMO.  4 should return "c:." and 5
"c:/path/to/a".