From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-42780-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 15902 invoked by alias); 9 Feb 2006 20:24:27 -0000
Received: (qmail 15892 invoked by uid 22791); 9 Feb 2006 20:24:26 -0000
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from romy.inter.net.il (HELO romy.inter.net.il) (192.114.186.66)     by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Thu, 09 Feb 2006 20:24:25 +0000
Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 (IGLD-80-230-71-5.inter.net.il [80.230.71.5]) 	by romy.inter.net.il (MOS 3.7.3-GA) 	with ESMTP id DNP02008 (AUTH halo1); 	Thu, 9 Feb 2006 22:24:20 +0200 (IST)
Date: Thu, 09 Feb 2006 20:24:00 -0000
Message-Id: <ufyms46x4.fsf@gnu.org>
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
To: "Mark Kettenis" <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl>
CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
In-reply-to: <25509.192.87.1.22.1139496017.squirrel@webmail.xs4all.nl> 	(mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl)
Subject: Re: RFA: Support Windows extended error numbers in safe_strerror
Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
References: <20060203215455.GA3501@nevyn.them.org>     <20060206173550.GB22947@nevyn.them.org>     <200602062254.k16MsagK009925@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl>     <20060206225829.GA31895@nevyn.them.org>     <20060208000855.GA5040@nevyn.them.org>     <200602082107.k18L7xRh013417@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl>     <umzh14iub.fsf@gnu.org>     <200602082310.k18NAQNe027038@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl>     <20060208232213.GA9008@nevyn.them.org> <25509.192.87.1.22.1139496017.squirrel@webmail.xs4all.nl>
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
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: 2006-02/txt/msg00218.txt.bz2

> Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2006 15:40:17 +0100 (CET)
> From: "Mark Kettenis" <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl>
> 
> Sorry, but from Mark's first batch of patches I got the impression that
> Codesourcery was contributing well-tested code and no further changes would
> be necessary.

There's no such thing as ``no further changes necessary'' in
programming, Mark, I'm sure you know it.

> It seems that nearly all global maintainers still think MinGW
> support is worth the additional cost, but I had to make sure we
> realise that there *is* a cost.

Yes, there _is_ a cost, but until now I'd say it was rather
insignificant.