Re: RFA: Support Windows extended error numbers in safe_strerror

[Jim Blandy <jimb at red-bean dot com>]

On 2/8/06, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:
> > Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2006 16:12:45 -0800
> > From: Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com>
> > Cc: bob@brasko.net, drow@false.org, gdb-patches@sourceware.org
> >
> > I therefore support, for the little it is worth, Daniel's efforts
> > into contributing their patches.
>
> IMHO, it's worth a lot.
>
> Mark, I think you should reconsider your ideological antagonism, if
> indeed there is one, for haveing MinGW code in GDB.  If you still
> think MinGW support should be dropped, please start another thread (I
> suggest on gdb@) for discussing that.

I'd like to second Eli's thoughts here.

I think it's clearly in GDB's interests to insist that the interface
between GDB's core code and host-specific code be clean and
well-defined.  Eli's suggestion that we use global function pointers
that the host-specific file can override suits me fine; I prefer it to
header files defining macros, for reasons I've explained.  But if the
interfaces are simple enough, I don't think we have reason to reject
ports to other platforms.