From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12636 invoked by alias); 9 Aug 2006 21:28:00 -0000 Received: (qmail 12624 invoked by uid 22791); 9 Aug 2006 21:28:00 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from pool-71-248-179-229.bstnma.fios.verizon.net (HELO cgf.cx) (71.248.179.229) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 21:27:58 +0000 Received: by cgf.cx (Postfix, from userid 201) id 481B513C042; Wed, 9 Aug 2006 17:27:57 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2006 21:28:00 -0000 From: Christopher Faylor To: gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: Why gdb 6.5 prints fullname in /cygdrive/... format om Windows? Message-ID: <20060809212757.GA4545@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> Mail-Followup-To: gdb@sourceware.org References: <44D832EE.2040405@sun.com> <17624.26822.63634.129976@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> <20060808131823.GB16362@nevyn.them.org> <20060808152923.GA23703@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> <20060808173127.GA27456@brasko.net> <20060808173555.GA24654@nevyn.them.org> <44D9A819.1010007@st.com> <20060809181020.GA23962@brasko.net> <20060809181819.GQ1385@adacore.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060809181819.GQ1385@adacore.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-08/txt/msg00078.txt.bz2 On Wed, Aug 09, 2006 at 11:18:19AM -0700, Joel Brobecker wrote: >>Of course, don't count on this working. The GDB could easily be built >>on Cygwin, and the cygwin1.dll delivered. In this case there will be >>no cygpath, and your front end won't work. > >Just FYI, and Chris might contradict me, but delivering cygwin1.dll >introduces some issues that are not necessarily easy to overcome. Nope. You are spot on, Joel. And, thanks for offering independent verification of this point. >One of them is compatibility when the end user already has a cygwin >installation present on his system. When that happens, very often the >two will not be able to coexist at the same time and the user may see >error messages saying that the application could not be loaded because >of such issues. We've been able to work around this problem so far by >having the cygwin install and our debugger use the same one (which one >do you choose?), but I think it might be a risky practice. There are issues involved with using two versions of cygwin1.dll on the same system and they can manifest no matter how much binary editing you do or source code modification you do. It is safest to have only the most recent version on your system. Cygwin wasn't designed to be distributed as a standalone DLL. While you can do that, this practice, like the use of MS-DOS paths is not something that is guaranteed to work 100% correctly. cgf