This is the mail archive of the 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]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: shared lib dos filename style - one more question

On Tuesday 13 October 2009 06:24:37, Joel Brobecker wrote:
> > If unixify is supposed to support Windows file semantics, then the
> > last 2 cases are incorrect, IMO. ?4 should return "c:." and 5
> > "c:/path/to/a".
> Actually, I think in this case "unixify" would mean trying to make
> sense out of Windows path on a Unix machine: The target sent us
> c:\path\to\dll, and we're trying to find that dll on the host.
> So best guess on the host is probably /path/to/dll. ?After that,
> we should be able to use the root prefix setting, if necessary,
> in order to find the file on the host.

That leaves out drives other than "c:", unlike Eli's version.
Do we always want to discard that possibility?
If the "c:/" isn't there, then at least a "c/" could be, so that
you can still map a "d:" using directories or symlinks on
the host, something like this:


Leaving the ':' in:


The former, without ':' allows using the same sysroot
on a Windows host, since I don't think you can create
directories with ':' there.

 Wine maps a "sysroot" similarly:

  ls -als .wine/dosdevices/
  c: -> ../harddiskvolume1
  d: -> ../harddiskvolume2
  z: -> /

 Look, a file named 'c:' on a unix box! Okay, this
 case doesn't really count.  :-)

Worth considering, IMHO, perhaps as an optional mode,
similar (or exactly like) to Daniel's tri-state
setting suggestion.

Pedro Alves

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