Re: Build question

Danny Backx
2009-09-01T20:10:40Z

On Tue, 2009-09-01 at 22:31 +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > From: Danny Backx <danny.backx@scarlet.be>
> > Cc: tromey@redhat.com, gdb@sourceware.org
> > Date: Tue, 01 Sep 2009 20:04:55 +0200
> >
> > Getting most things I care about to work is done by simplifying
> > include/filenames.h so it unconditionally takes the DOS versions of
> > IS_DIR_SEPARATOR() and IS_ABSOLUTE_PATH().
>
> If Unix users will not be too unhappy about that, as Daniel says, I
> don't mind. But I still think it's a better idea to have a
> user-settable option to control that at runtime.

I'm not opposed to introducing user-settable options, I just phrased the
analysis based on what I saw.

> > The code in bfd/archive.c could probably be cleaned up based on
> > IS_DIR_SEPARATOR.
> Even better, just use lbasename or even basename.

Except (see also your other mail) this is in libiberty.

> > Same, I think, for gdb/cli/cli-cmds.c.
>
> No, this one needs another macro: FILENAME_PREFIX_LEN, which should be
> 1 on Posix platforms and 3 on DOS-ish systems. Use the DOS-ish
> variant on Posix systems if "d:/foo" is not an important file name.

Should I then look into :
- changing HAVE_DOS_BASED_FILE_SYSTEM into a variable
- doing the same thing for FILENAME_PREFIX_LEN and FILENAME_CMPN

Danny
--
Danny Backx ; danny.backx - at - scarlet.be ; http://danny.backx.info