On Sun, 11 Jan 2004, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 11, 2004 at 09:57:29PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >>Sorry, but no. The CVS version of cygwin already has a stub of a fifo
> >>implementation and the device/fhandler stuff is much different than
> >>1.5.5.
> >
> >But if I change the patch to be compliant with last CVS, should you change
> >the answer?
>
> Sorry but it's unlikely. As I said, there is already a start of an
> implementation for this which I am unlikely to want to throw out.
>
> I expect to have a working fifo implementation in a couple of releases.
> It's the next thing I'll work on after fixing the signal/thread problems
> in the current CVS.
"in a couple of releases"? Oh, come on, Chris, have a heart for once.
Couldn't you at least look at what he's done? You've just barely started
while he's actually got something working.
--
Peter A. Castro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> or <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"Cats are just autistic Dogs" -- Dr. Tony Attwood
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
