Re: [PATCH] gnulib: import sys_wait

[Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>]

On 14 Jun 2021 15:18, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2021 01:25:19 -0400
> > From: Mike Frysinger via Gdb-patches <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
> > 
> > +/* Native Windows API.  */
> > +
> > +# include <signal.h> /* for SIGTERM */
> > +
> > +/* The following macros apply to an argument x, that is a status of a process,
> > +   as returned by waitpid() or, equivalently, _cwait() or GetExitCodeProcess().
> > +   This value is simply an 'int', not composed of bit fields.  */
> > +
> > +/* When an unhandled fatal signal terminates a process, the exit code is 3.  */
> > +# define WIFSIGNALED(x) ((x) == 3)
> > +# define WIFEXITED(x) ((x) != 3)
> > +# define WIFSTOPPED(x) 0
> > +
> > +/* The signal that terminated a process is not known posthum.  */
> > +# define WTERMSIG(x) SIGTERM
> > +
> > +# define WEXITSTATUS(x) (x)
> > +
> > +/* There are no stopping signals.  */
> > +# define WSTOPSIG(x) 0
> > +
> > +/* There are no core dumps.  */
> > +# define WCOREDUMP(x) 0
> 
> AFAIU, this conflicts with what we have in gdbsupport/gdb_wait.h and
> use in windows-nat.c and win32-low.cc.  Worse, the Gnulib emulation of
> this for Windows is (IMNSHO) less useful, since it doesn't support any
> abnormal termination except the equivalent of SIGABRT (which causes
> the Windows runtime to exit with status = 3).  I tried to convince the
> Gnulib folks to adopt a more useful emulation, similar to what we have
> in gdb_wait.h, but AFAIR Bruno Haible rejected the idea.

i don't think there's any conflicts.  gdb* dirs probe the env w/out gnulib,
so they'll see sys/wait.h is not available, and then the gdb_wait.h and such
files will continue to be used.

> Did you need this Gnulib module because those sims don't use
> gdbsupport?  And if so, is it possible to somehow avoid clashes
> between this Gnulib module and what we have in gdb_wait.h?

sim/ doesn't use gdbsupport/.  the gdbsupport/ dir assumes it's used with
only gdb/, and is C++, so i don't think trying to generalize it is worth
the effort.
-mike