From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrew Cagney To: Christopher Faylor Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: DOS/Windows-specific code: ser-tcp.c [need ruling from Andrew] Date: Wed, 09 May 2001 09:29:00 -0000 Message-id: <3AF9707E.1060308@cygnus.com> References: <20010503211502.21716.qmail@web6401.mail.yahoo.com> <3AF1DAA0.3060702@cygnus.com> <200105071609.TAA24129@is.elta.co.il> <200105081154.OAA06318@is.elta.co.il> <1010509065322.ZM22268@ocotillo.lan> <20010509095816.A31509@redhat.com> X-SW-Source: 2001-05/msg00190.html > I can't comment on the Cygwin part of the question, but it seems >>to me like it'd be a good idea to to use HAVE_NETINET_TCP_H. > > > netinet/tcp.h is not specific to Cygwin. The include isn't even required > on Cygwin, AFAICT. I'll submit a patch to remove it. > > Andrew, do I need permission to check in a Cygwin-specific change to a > module that is not technically "mine" if the patch only touches > Cygwin-specific code? > > This one is classifiable as an "obvious" fix but I'm just wondering for > future reference. I think most host related fixes are ``obvious''. The maintainers file says: `` Host/Native: The Native maintainer is responsible for target specific native support - typically shared libraries and quirks to procfs/ptrace/... The Native maintainer works with the Arch and Core maintainers when resolving more generic problems. The host maintainer ensures that gdb (including mmalloc) can be built as a cross debugger on their platform. '' along with: `` Makefile.in, configure* ALL '' Getting something to build (not work) really should just involve obvious fixes. If you find you're adding lots of #if/#elses then I suspect alarm bells will go off in your own head - there is something wrong here - long before you post the patch. Besides, configury changes are mostly suck it and see - very iterative in nature. enjoy, Andrew