From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-79473-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 31184 invoked by alias); 9 Mar 2011 05:29:23 -0000
Received: (qmail 30838 invoked by uid 22791); 9 Mar 2011 05:29:20 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.0 required=5.0	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from fencepost.gnu.org (HELO fencepost.gnu.org) (140.186.70.10)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 09 Mar 2011 05:29:12 +0000
Received: from eliz by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.71)	(envelope-from <eliz@gnu.org>)	id 1PxBxN-0005a9-GM; Wed, 09 Mar 2011 00:29:09 -0500
Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2011 07:12:00 -0000
Message-Id: <E1PxBxN-0005a9-GM@fencepost.gnu.org>
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
To: Pedro Alves <pedro@codesourcery.com>
CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, dj@redhat.com,	ktietz70@googlemail.com, binutils@sourceware.org,	gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
In-reply-to: <201103082238.00289.pedro@codesourcery.com> (message from Pedro	Alves on Tue, 8 Mar 2011 22:37:59 +0000)
Subject: Re: [patch libiberty include]: Add additional helper functions for directory-separator searching
Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
References: <AANLkTimyJb-3jEaWbbmUj2ZAOYPzhGT_GX9QFwR4DBCh@mail.gmail.com> <83aah5h34g.fsf@gnu.org> <201103081941.p28Jf0Uq027041@greed.delorie.com> <201103082238.00289.pedro@codesourcery.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: 2011-03/txt/msg00586.txt.bz2

> From: Pedro Alves <pedro@codesourcery.com>
> Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2011 22:37:59 +0000
> Cc: DJ Delorie <dj@redhat.com>,
>  Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>,
>  ktietz70@googlemail.com,
>  binutils@sourceware.org,
>  gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> 
> Actually, is there any case where lbasename wouldn't
> work instead of filename_dirrchr?

Almost: lbasename returns a pointer one character _after_ the last
slash.  It also skips the drive letter on DOS/Windows (which might be
TRT, actually).

It would be reasonable to rewrite filename_dirrchr in terms of
lbasename, though, by backing up the pointer returned by lbasename if
it points to a slash, and otherwise returning NULL.  The case of
"d:foo" should also be resolved (probably, return a pointer to the
colon).