From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20743 invoked by alias); 4 Feb 2006 06:22:21 -0000 Received: (qmail 20734 invoked by uid 22791); 4 Feb 2006 06:22:20 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from yosemite.airs.com (HELO yosemite.airs.com) (205.217.158.180) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with SMTP; Sat, 04 Feb 2006 06:22:19 +0000 Received: (qmail 24774 invoked by uid 10); 4 Feb 2006 06:22:18 -0000 Received: (qmail 3129 invoked by uid 500); 4 Feb 2006 06:22:10 -0000 To: Daniel Jacobowitz Cc: Jim Blandy , Mark Kettenis , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: RFA: Support Windows extended error numbers in safe_strerror References: <20060203215455.GA3501@nevyn.them.org> <200602032325.k13NPJ6g028001@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <8f2776cb0602031706s55e09abfr4354becf8278921c@mail.gmail.com> <20060204030025.GA9890@nevyn.them.org> From: Ian Lance Taylor Date: Sat, 04 Feb 2006 06:22:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20060204030025.GA9890@nevyn.them.org> Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-02/txt/msg00056.txt.bz2 Daniel Jacobowitz writes: > Except we're trying to kill the aggravating NM files, remember? Also, > it would be an XM file, and we've already successfully killed those (or > most of them). We replaced them with autoconf magic, which is not > fundamentally different from the USE_WIN32API bits. USE_WIN32API is different because it selects an API which is not Unix like. It's the only non-Unix-like host which gdb runs on today. I think it would be reasonable to have special .h and .c files to handle Windows code. You can call them XM files, or you can call them something else. Scattering Windows code through the Unix code seems like a bad idea to me. I think that scattering autoconf magic through the code is also a bad idea, and should be avoided. But I think it is less bad, because at least the code all looks the same. Windows code does not. Ian