This is the mail archive of the gdb@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the GDB project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: [Mingw-users] Re: _WIN32?



--- Andrew Cagney <ac131313@cygnus.com> wrote: > > ACT, Inc. is also committed
to producing or assisting in a MINGW32
> > port of GDB5, and contributing the necessary patches.  However, I
> > don't have a timetable for this yet.
> > 
> > In any case, again this argues against removing the _WIN32 conditionals.
> 
> I'm not so sure.  It depends on why/how the tests are there. For instance:
> 
> 
> #if defined(_WIN32) || defined(__MSDOS__) || defined(__CYGWIN__):
> 
> Remember, GDB is moving away from OS specific tests and towards 
> autoconf/feature based tests.  Things like this should be replaced by

> something like WITH_REALLY_TRICKY_FILESYSTEM_SUPPORT test (and 
> eventually changed to a runtime switch?).
> 
> 
> main.c:
>    /* The default command loop.
>       The WIN32 Gui calls this main to set up gdb's state, and
>       has its own command loop. */
> #if !defined _WIN32 || defined __GNUC__
>    /* GUIs generally have their own command loop, mainloop, or
>       whatever.  This is a good place to gain control because many
>       error conditions will end up here via longjmp(). */
> The _WIN32 test here is probably for wingdb (and old, long dead, MS 
> Windows based GDB) and not for mingw.  There are plenty of other 
> examples of the same thing.
> 
> For reference, there are ~38 uses of _WIN32 in the sources, ~18 don't 
> appear to be accompanied by #ifdef MSDOS, CYGWIN or GO32. It is those 18 
> that I think should be deleted.
> 
> 	Andrew
> 
>
In trying to get GDB to work under mingw, I have found the #if(n)def _WIN32 
useful as tags to look for potential trouble spots, but let me ask you to
clarify something:

You are proposing that something like this in inflow.c 

#ifndef _WIN32
  kill (PIDGET (inferior_pid), SIGINT);
#endif

would be replaced with something like this:

#ifndef _N0_KILL_
  kill (PIDGET (inferior_pid), SIGINT);
#endif

with configure defining _NO_KILL for me.

Is that correct?  If so, then I have no objections to replacing the _WIN32
conditionals with something more specific.

Danny

_____________________________________________________________________________
http://store.yahoo.com.au - Yahoo! Store
- It's time you had your business online!


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]