From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23588 invoked by alias); 21 Aug 2009 21:57:10 -0000 Received: (qmail 23547 invoked by uid 22791); 21 Aug 2009 21:57:06 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 21 Aug 2009 21:56:55 +0000 Received: from int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n7LLumSe003355; Fri, 21 Aug 2009 17:56:48 -0400 Received: from ns3.rdu.redhat.com (ns3.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.255.199]) by int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n7LLultP032021; Fri, 21 Aug 2009 17:56:47 -0400 Received: from opsy.redhat.com (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by ns3.rdu.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n7LLukL8009411; Fri, 21 Aug 2009 17:56:46 -0400 Received: by opsy.redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 500) id C713E3782EF; Fri, 21 Aug 2009 15:56:45 -0600 (MDT) From: Tom Tromey To: danny.backx@scarlet.be Cc: Eli Zaretskii , gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: Build question References: <1250803105.11282.96.camel@pavilion> <83d46pgjkq.fsf@gnu.org> <1250877901.11282.116.camel@pavilion> <83ab1tgh9h.fsf@gnu.org> <1250880746.11282.128.camel@pavilion> Reply-To: Tom Tromey Date: Sat, 22 Aug 2009 09:03:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <1250880746.11282.128.camel@pavilion> (Danny Backx's message of "Fri, 21 Aug 2009 20:52:26 +0200") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii 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: 2009-08/txt/msg00219.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Danny" == Danny Backx writes: Danny> I am building i386-mingw32ce-gdb (or arm-mingw32ce-gdb). The targets Danny> specified are Windows CE based, so they all have this "DOS BASED" file Danny> system. So why test this at run time ? IIUC, the problem is that gdb doesn't really differentiate between target file names and host file names. This matters because some things are searched for on the host but some on the target. If you want to always define HAVE_DOS_BASED_FILE_SYSTEM, I guess that is possible. It is hard to picture when that would be appropriate for CVS GDB, though, due to --enable-targets=all. If you don't want to mix different kinds of file names, then could you further explain this note? http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2009-08/msg00160.html It looks to me that the "good" scenario here mixes Unix-like and DOS-like filenames, but I don't understand that. Tom