[Oops, I've sent this to Gerrit by PM instead of to the list. Just resending it now for the records]
On Dec 12 14:54, Gerrit P. Haase wrote: > Corinna Vinschen wrote: > >>----- Forwarded message from "Gerrit P. Haase" ----- > >>nearly all sem_* functions are available, but sem_unlock is missing, > >>was there a problem implementing sem_unlock() or was it just missed > >>by accident? > >>Gerrit > >>----- End forwarded message ----- > > > >I guess you're asking about sem_unlink(). It's not implemented so far > >since named POSIX semaphores are implemented using named Windows > >semaphores. The SUSv3 description contains a pretty unfortunate > >implementation detail: > > > > Calls to sem_open() to recreate or reconnect to the semaphore refer > > to a new semaphore after sem_unlink() is called. > > > >There's no way I know of, which allows to implement this using named > >Windows semaphores. At least not without adding a lot of annoying > >bookkeeping overhead, possibly involving cygserver. > > I got an undefined reference to sem_unlock(). There's no such function defined in SUSv3. Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Project Co-Leader mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Red Hat, Inc. -- 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/
