Re: Windows support in GDB

Eli Zaretskii
2005-05-01T20:13:37Z

> Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 12:51:48 -0400
> From: Christopher Faylor <me@cgf.cx>
>
> >What's the failure mode going to be? If a POSIX person adds a use of
> >non-Windows function, without appropriate #ifdef, then the Windows side
> >of things will break. At that point, assuming that people are noticing
> >(which we will!), we'll fix that.
>
> I guess the failure mode will be roughly similar to DJGPP. Every time
> someone decides that it would be nice to use signal(), select(), fifos,
> inodes, unix-domain sockets, or some other non-msdos construct there
> will have to be a discussion about how to make things work. But, I
> guess we'd already be having this discussion to with DJGPP so maybe it
> won't be a big deal.

DJGPP has less problems than MinGW because DJGPP is more Posix
compliant. E.g., out of the non-msdos constructs you mentioned, DJGPP
has `signal', `select', and inodes.

But yes, quite a few of Unixish assumptions already bit the dust since
the DJGPP port is part of GDB. IS_ABSOLUTE_PATH and similar
abstractions come to mind, as does DIRNAME_SEPARATOR. Undoubtedly,
this is one reason why the MinGW port additions were relatively minor.