From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-42638-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 10293 invoked by alias); 4 Feb 2006 15:09:02 -0000
Received: (qmail 10283 invoked by uid 22791); 4 Feb 2006 15:09:01 -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; Sat, 04 Feb 2006 15:09:01 +0000
Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 (IGLD-84-228-244-26.inter.net.il [84.228.244.26]) 	by romy.inter.net.il (MOS 3.7.3-GA) 	with ESMTP id DML13194 (AUTH halo1); 	Sat, 4 Feb 2006 17:08:57 +0200 (IST)
Date: Sat, 04 Feb 2006 15:09:00 -0000
Message-Id: <uwtgbjh4f.fsf@gnu.org>
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
In-reply-to: <20060204145332.GB17011@nevyn.them.org> (message from Daniel 	Jacobowitz on Sat, 4 Feb 2006 09:53:32 -0500)
Subject: Re: RFA: Support Windows extended error numbers in safe_strerror
Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
References: <20060203215455.GA3501@nevyn.them.org> <u64nvnxmy.fsf@gnu.org> <20060204145332.GB17011@nevyn.them.org>
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/msg00076.txt.bz2

> Date: Sat, 4 Feb 2006 09:53:32 -0500
> From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>
> 
> Well, it can't be in win32-nat.c - it's for Windows hosting rather
> than Windows native.  But I could move the code to a new
> Windows-specific file, like ser-windows.o introduced in my other
> patch, and call it there.  I've no objection to that.

ser-windows.c would be good, I think.

Does anyone else object to that?