From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13836 invoked by alias); 2 Oct 2004 03:37:35 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 13827 invoked from network); 2 Oct 2004 03:37:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO cgf.cx) (66.30.17.189) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 2 Oct 2004 03:37:34 -0000 Received: by cgf.cx (Postfix, from userid 201) id 1C9531B3D6; Fri, 1 Oct 2004 23:37:43 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 02 Oct 2004 03:37:00 -0000 From: Christopher Faylor To: gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: Building GDB with MinGW (3) Message-ID: <20041002033743.GE14081@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> Mail-Followup-To: gdb@sourceware.org References: <20041001151052.70124.qmail@web11904.mail.yahoo.com> <20041001151613.12427.qmail@web11903.mail.yahoo.com> <20041001165127.GI26324@gnat.com> <415E1045.7030109@meer.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <415E1045.7030109@meer.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i X-SW-Source: 2004-10/txt/msg00013.txt.bz2 On Fri, Oct 01, 2004 at 07:19:49PM -0700, Dan Mosedale wrote: >[Third re-send attempt, sorry about the mailer issues] Who are you apologizing to? If you had problems sending no one would have seen them. >Joel Brobecker wrote: >>>real problem. (READLINE) >> >>As far as I can remember, GDB has not been ported to MingW. And indeed, >>porting readline is one of the problems to solve for that port. There is >>a group that has posted patches that allow you to build GDB on MingW, >>they have a web site. I don't know the URL but google should help you >>find it. Last I heard, they had ported GDB 5.3, but maybe they have >>patches for a more recent release now. > >Actually, it has. See . Maybe at some point someone will actually do it right and try to submit patches to gdb. >One of the tarballs for the most recent snapshot version includes the >patch against the mainline. It's from around May, so I suspect the >patch will require some massaging if you want it to work against >current CVS. The best thing about the port is that, unlike the cygwin >port, hitting ^c to stop the inferior seems to actually work most of >the time (assuming you run the gdb in a cmd window and not a cygwin >window). This is because it relies on windows native events rather >than cygwin signals. CTRL-C works fine on cygwin. I use it all of the time. In fact, CTRL-C does not rely on cygwin signals. gdb doesn't know about cygwin signals from the inferior process. I haven't looked at what mingw does but it is likely to be the same code. cgf