From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 32312 invoked by alias); 31 Jan 2008 18:15:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 32302 invoked by uid 22791); 31 Jan 2008 18:15:47 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from fk-out-0910.google.com (HELO fk-out-0910.google.com) (209.85.128.187) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Thu, 31 Jan 2008 18:15:17 +0000 Received: by fk-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id 26so787069fkx.8 for ; Thu, 31 Jan 2008 10:15:12 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.82.106.14 with SMTP id e14mr4324917buc.38.1201803311972; Thu, 31 Jan 2008 10:15:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?192.168.0.101? ( [85.240.251.38]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id i6sm12614554gve.5.2008.01.31.10.15.10 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Thu, 31 Jan 2008 10:15:10 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <47A2102F.3050300@portugalmail.pt> Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 18:15:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; pt-BR; rv:1.8.1.9) Gecko/20071031 Thunderbird/2.0.0.9 Mnenhy/0.7.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Pedro Alves , gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: Small remote file transfer protocol adition References: <479EAB6F.8040505@portugalmail.pt> <479F4456.1090306@portugalmail.pt> <20080129164334.GA1457@caradoc.them.org> <479F67BE.8040504@portugalmail.pt> <20080131145607.GA454@caradoc.them.org> In-Reply-To: <20080131145607.GA454@caradoc.them.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2008-01/txt/msg00365.txt.bz2 Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > On Tue, Jan 29, 2008 at 05:51:58PM +0000, Pedro Alves wrote: >> Well, since you ask :-) I'd prefer my first suggestion, just >> because it's simpler. No worries about buffer size >> limits, and the message being truncated. If passing a message, >> I'd have to be careful with what I'd say there, so it >> doesn't confuse the user (strerror says one thing, native >> error says something similar but not the same, possibly in >> different locales). This probably means I'd just pass the error >> number anyway. > > Yes, I see. I'm convinced. > Proposed patch posted here: http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2008-01/msg00860.html -- Pedro Alves