Re: Path handling bug in GDB included with MingW 3.1.0-1

[Eli Zaretskii <eliz at elta dot co dot il>]

> Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2003 19:22:34 -0400
> From: Christopher Faylor <cgf@redhat.com>
> 
> Do we *really* want to go down the road of supporting a patched gdb
> here?  There are people who are familiar with the changes that have gone
> into mingw gdb in the mingw mailing list.  For whatever reason, they
> have chosen not to spend any time getting their patches back into gdb
> proper and do not, apparently, read this mailing list.
> 
> I don't see any reason why we should be taking up bandwidth trying to
> support what is essentially a gdb fork here.

Perhaps there's history to this that I'm not aware of.  All I saw was
a question from a user of a GDB port for which I thought I could
provide some help at a price of a few moments required to write a
short email message.  I don't see the alleged waste of bandwidth as a
real issue here (I doubt that you do, too), and have no idea how
heavily is the MinGW port patched and whether the patch authors
unwillingness to send the patches upstream is something that warrants
a boycott on their users.

For the record, I do see it as a Good Thing to have the MinGW port as
part of the official GDB distro, and if my response was even a small
contribution to that, my time and our bandwidth were well spent.  You
don't win the hearts of people by refusing to answer their questions,
at least in my experience.

[Sorry for being a bit blunt, but I was quite astonished of being
pounced upon for answering a simple request.]