On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 05:22:06PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote: >On May 17 10:56, Christopher Faylor wrote: >> On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 12:26:55PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote: >> >On May 17 12:56, Fedin Pavel wrote: >> >> Hello! >> >> >> >> > The reason for this behaviour has been outlined a couple of times on >> >> > this list. See http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2013-01/msg00173.html, >> >> > for instance. >> >> >> >> Heh... >> >> So, complete emulation would cost a major performance drop, right ? >> >> Well... Can there be any setting which enables these checks ? At least >> >> we have one use case... >> > >> >Not without lots of new code. >> >> So, maybe next Thursday? > >I would love to, but unfortunately I have to brush my cat on Thursday. >And I don't even have a cat.
You're welcome to brush mine in that case. I don't have one either. So it sounds like we may have a feline inavailability deadlock. 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
