From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4160 invoked by alias); 2 May 2005 19:03:27 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 4129 invoked from network); 2 May 2005 19:03:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO legolas.inter.net.il) (192.114.186.24) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 2 May 2005 19:03:17 -0000 Received: from zaretski (IGLD-80-230-71-109.inter.net.il [80.230.71.109]) by legolas.inter.net.il (MOS 3.5.6-GR) with ESMTP id EGX15509 (AUTH halo1); Mon, 2 May 2005 22:02:51 +0300 (IDT) Date: Mon, 02 May 2005 19:03:00 -0000 From: "Eli Zaretskii" To: gdb@sourceware.org Message-ID: <01c54f49$Blat.v2.4$609aece0@zahav.net.il> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 In-reply-to: <20050501214128.GA23129@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> (message from Christopher Faylor on Sun, 1 May 2005 17:41:28 -0400) Subject: Re: Windows support in GDB Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii References: <200504291513.j3TFDhjx021040@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <20050429153146.GA27362@nevyn.them.org> <20050429160040.GH10017@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> <42726061.5090101@qnx.com> <20050429163011.GB12864@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> <427267B7.8020107@qnx.com> <01c54e87$Blat.v2.4$40320aa0@zahav.net.il> <20050501214128.GA23129@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> X-SW-Source: 2005-05/txt/msg00017.txt.bz2 > Date: Sun, 1 May 2005 17:41:28 -0400 > From: Christopher Faylor > > >In fact, any serious use of GDB will almost instantly bump into such a > >consistency (or lack thereof) issue. For example, will the `edit' and > >`shell' commands work if I don't have a Cygwin Bash installed and GDB > >is configured to invoke that Bash as the shell? > > And, if they don't, what's the solution? You fix it so they will work. > Presumably, if there is no /bin/sh.exe available, you'd use a fallback. > You could even implement a switch to force cygwin's gdb into "windows > path mode". You could do all that and more, but AFAIK that'd be against the ``spirit of Cygwin'', which is to solve all incompatibilities in the runtime, and leave the application sources more or less intact. If you leave the application sources intact, the Unixy shell assumptions, like the -c switch and redirection syntax, will be hard to solve inside the library that implements fork/exec or whatever. > I *suspect* however, that fixing cygwin's gdb to better handle > windows paths is probably a lot less work than what Mark did. I actually think the other way around. But I certainly don't want to start a Cygwin-yaye-o-nay dispute.