My tests indicated that the changes are working correctly.
Peter On Jun 30, 2005, at 8:23 PM, Christopher Faylor wrote:
We're coming close to a 1.5.18 release. Please try the latest snapshot at http://cygwin.com/snapshots/ and help verify that there are no regresions against 1.5.17. I'm particularly interested in hearing if the changes made (at users's requests) to the default mutex handling in pthread.h are working correctly. Specifically, does this: Index: include/pthread.h =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/uberbaum/winsup/cygwin/include/pthread.h,v retrieving revision 1.21 retrieving revision 1.23 diff -u -d -1 -r1.21 -r1.23 --- include/pthread.h 2 May 2005 03:50:09 -0000 1.21 +++ include/pthread.h 11 Jun 2005 04:56:36 -0000 1.23 @@ -55,3 +55,3 @@ #define PTHREAD_MUTEX_NORMAL 2 -#define PTHREAD_MUTEX_DEFAULT PTHREAD_MUTEX_ERRORCHECK +#define PTHREAD_MUTEX_DEFAULT PTHREAD_MUTEX_NORMAL /* this should be too low to ever be a valid address */ do what was requested? This simple change required a lot of changes in the cygwin test suite so I'm not entirely convinced that it was a good thing yet. cgf -- 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/
Enjoy, Peter ------------------------------- A Møøse once bit my sister -- 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/
