This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [PATCH 1/4] GDBSERVER: Listen on a unix domain (instead of TCP) socket if requested.
On 2018-10-29 5:11 a.m., Rainer Orth wrote:
> Hi John,
>
>> However I've checked in a fix for this issue, and tested it by building
>> natively with a hacked set of standard include headers.
>
> you always need to post patches here, if only for reference.
Not only should you post here the patches you push as obvious, but I don't
think that this:
https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;a=commit;h=98a17ece013cb94cd602496b9efb92b8816b3953
falls under the obvious rule:
https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;a=blob;f=gdb/MAINTAINERS;h=d5154d394206861ef5471b4984a4762589c34fc4;hb=HEAD#l82
I can't judge whether the patch is right or not with a quick glance, but it
certainly is complex enough to warrant a discussion (as Rainer's reply below
shows).
Additionally, it seems like the initial 4-patch series was pushed without
explicit approval from a maintainer (at least I can't find any). Next time,
please wait to have an approval before pushing. If you are not sure whether
a reply constitutes an a approval, it's better to ask the maintainer to
clarify.
> Besides, we're currently very inconsistent here (haven't checked which
> part of that is due to your code): most places use AF_UNIX, only two use
> AF_LOCAL instead (common/netstuff.c, gdbserver/remote-utils.c), and your
> configure check only checks for AF_LOCAL. I believe we should
> canonicalize for one of the two and allow for systems that define only
> one or the other.
mingw defines AF_UNIX, so I would tend to go towards that route. Any of you
knows what happens at runtime when you try to bind a AF_UNIX socket on mingw/Windows?
Simon