On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 08:20:00AM -0600, Eric Blake wrote: >On 04/27/2010 08:06 AM, Corinna Vinschen wrote: >>> And while we're touching the file, we probably want to do similar >>> treatment for struct siginfo_t: si_tid, si_overrun, si_sigval, si_value, >>> si_status, si_utime, si_stime, and si_addr. >> >> Does "we" mean you're going to provide a patch? > >Yes. Patch coming up shortly.
Wait. This is not the first time that this kind of issue has come up. I am extremely loath to stop using anonymous unions. So much so in fact, that I don't really care that this makes us slightly incompatible with Linux. Polluting the namespace like this is just ugly. I'd rather not do it. I'd rather tell the handful of applications which have problems with this that this is an incompatibility. cgf -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
