On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 10:18:39AM -0400, Edward Lam wrote: >On 8/31/2010 10:08 AM, Christopher Faylor wrote: >>Here's what I'm saying: It makes absolutely no sense that moving the >>call would have any effect. The code is the way it is for a reason so >>we're not going to just revert the change. > >I don't think anyone is asking to revert the change.
Don't be too sure. I'm sure that is the knee-jerk reaction of many reading the observations. >In any case, is it absolutely necessary for us to call >wait_for_sigthread() before we do the other initialization in >dll_crt0_1() ? ie. can we move it further down? Or perhaps we can >reorder the initialization code somewhat such that we can do more work >before calling wait_for_sigthread()? If you are capable of building from source then you can answer these questions for yourself. This is not terrifically complicated code we're talking about here. 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
