Re: RFA: Support Windows extended error numbers in safe_strerror

Eli Zaretskii
2006-02-09T08:00:59Z

> Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2006 00:10:26 +0100 (CET)
> From: Mark Kettenis <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl>
> CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
>
> but if we don't [drop the attempt to support MinGW], I want to make
> sure the MinGW support is integrated in such a way that its impact
> on the rest of the code is as small as possible.

Can you state what are your expectations from such a ``as small as
possible'' impact? That is, what are the do's and dont's which, if
satisfied, will cause you to endorse the MinGW support?

I think, if Daniel is about to rewrite his patches yet another time,
he deserves to know the rules of the game in advance.

For example, here's a suggestion for what I think is more seamless
integration of MinGW and other ``illegal aliens'', here for the
`select' issue:

int gdb_select (...)
{
if (select_hook)
return (*select_hook) (...);
else
return select (...);
}

We make `select_hook' a global pointer to a function, and then MinGW
can define its own emulation on win32-something.c and plug its address
into `select_hook'.

An advantage of this method is that the name of the-evil-whatever
thingy is never even mentioned.

Would this method be okay with you? For that matter, does anyone else
object to this?