From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 69659 invoked by alias); 18 Apr 2019 18:57:00 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 69647 invoked by uid 89); 18 Apr 2019 18:57:00 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-3.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 spammy=HX-Languages-Length:619 X-HELO: eggs.gnu.org Received: from eggs.gnu.org (HELO eggs.gnu.org) (209.51.188.92) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Thu, 18 Apr 2019 18:56:59 +0000 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:38007) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hHCDS-0005pc-0w; Thu, 18 Apr 2019 14:56:58 -0400 Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=3541 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1hHCDQ-0002GU-7o; Thu, 18 Apr 2019 14:56:56 -0400 Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2019 18:57:00 -0000 Message-Id: <83y347cfbu.fsf@gnu.org> From: Eli Zaretskii To: Pedro Alves CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org In-reply-to: <250801eb-14f6-5a35-0556-cf5797dd8a7b@redhat.com> (message from Pedro Alves on Thu, 18 Apr 2019 18:22:14 +0100) Subject: Re: Fix compilation using mingw.org's MinGW References: <835zrbe36c.fsf@gnu.org> <250801eb-14f6-5a35-0556-cf5797dd8a7b@redhat.com> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2019-04/txt/msg00359.txt.bz2 > From: Pedro Alves > Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2019 18:22:14 +0100 > > * Removed targets > > GDB no longer supports native debugging on versions of MS-Windows > before Windows XP. I was talking about compile time, not run time. In any case, if we don't support systems older than XP, then why do we load those functions dynamically at run time and call them via a function pointer? > So shouldn't we instead be setting _WIN32_WINNT to some > appropriate number? I don't mind, but where? And also: should we make such changes on the 8.3 branch at this time?