From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9256 invoked by alias); 8 Nov 2006 18:39:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 9246 invoked by uid 22791); 8 Nov 2006 18:39:47 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from pool-71-248-179-54.bstnma.fios.verizon.net (HELO cgf.cx) (71.248.179.54) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Wed, 08 Nov 2006 18:39:38 +0000 Received: by cgf.cx (Postfix, from userid 201) id 7E65313D3C7; Wed, 8 Nov 2006 13:39:36 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 08 Nov 2006 18:39:00 -0000 From: Christopher Faylor To: pedro_alves@portugalmail.pt, Daniel Jacobowitz , gdb@sourceware.org, Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: [RFC] MinGW and i386_pe_skip_trampoline_code Message-ID: <20061108183936.GA21403@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> Mail-Followup-To: pedro_alves@portugalmail.pt, Daniel Jacobowitz , gdb@sourceware.org, Eli Zaretskii References: <455125A3.30304@portugalmail.pt> <20061108015752.GA4565@nevyn.them.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: 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: 2006-11/txt/msg00042.txt.bz2 On Wed, Nov 08, 2006 at 06:19:12AM +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >>Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2006 20:57:52 -0500 >>From: Daniel Jacobowitz >> >>The FSF tree doesn't even support native GDB on MinGW, to the best of >>my knowledge. The MinGW people have local patches that I don't believe >>have ever been submitted (this is hearsay, I've never looked myself). > >Yes, you are right. I'm not one of the ``MinGW people'' who maintain >the native GDB, but I've seen the patches, and they aren't in the >official sources, for reasons that evade me. Isn't the ownership of the patches questionable so there is no clear way to assign them to the FSF? cgf