On 02/10/2011 12:58 PM, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 10:37:45AM -0700, Eric Blake wrote:
>> Pushed, and squashed into minor version 236. I've also updated
>> new-features.sgml.
>
> Thanks Eric.
Shoot - I pushed too early; I'm pushing this follow-up patch to fix the
tempora
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 10:37:45AM -0700, Eric Blake wrote:
>Pushed, and squashed into minor version 236. I've also updated
>new-features.sgml.
Thanks Eric.
cgf
On 02/10/2011 02:55 AM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Feb 10 10:50, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>> On Feb 9 21:15, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>> On Wed, Feb 09, 2011 at 05:20:59PM -0700, Eric Blake wrote:
+/* Newlib's provides declarations for two strerror_r
+ variants, according to prepro
On 2011-02-11 AM 12:32, Christopher Faylor wrote:
-void __stdcall
+void __stdcall __attribute__ ((regparm (1), noreturn))
do_exit (int status)
{
no. it doesn't fix sigsegv, but for compilation error in 4.6.
to summerize, all changes of function definition fixes compilation error
in gcc 4.6(tr
On Feb 10 10:29, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 03:15:15PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >Ok, I have just a problem. Your patch doesn't apply because your
> >mail client appears to insert line breaks if the lines get too long.
> >Please send the patch again without the line
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 10:50:54AM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>On Feb 9 21:15, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 09, 2011 at 05:20:59PM -0700, Eric Blake wrote:
>> >+/* Newlib's provides declarations for two strerror_r
>> >+ variants, according to preprocessor feature macros. It doe
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 11:56:52PM +0900, jojelino wrote:
>i am sorry for extra line feed. corrected.
>requesting review.
>Index: winsup/cygwin/dcrt0.cc
>===
>RCS file: /cvs/src/src/winsup/cygwin/dcrt0.cc,v
>retrieving revision 1.390
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 03:15:15PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>On Feb 10 21:47, jojelino wrote:
>> On 2011-02-10 19:02, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>>
>> >Also, it would be nice if you would add more words to explain what your
>> >patch is doing. Just a patch with no explanation is not very invit
On 2011-02-11 AM 12:02, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
On Feb 10 23:56, jojelino wrote:
i am sorry for extra line feed. corrected.
requesting review.
Thanks, will do. Would you mind to give us your real name for the
ChangeLog entry?
Corinna
Jin-woo Ye.thank you
On Feb 10 23:56, jojelino wrote:
> i am sorry for extra line feed. corrected.
> requesting review.
Thanks, will do. Would you mind to give us your real name for the
ChangeLog entry?
Corinna
--
Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Project Co-Leader
i am sorry for extra line feed. corrected.
requesting review.
Index: winsup/cygwin/dcrt0.cc
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/src/winsup/cygwin/dcrt0.cc,v
retrieving revision 1.390
diff -u -r1.390 dcrt0.cc
--- winsup/cygwin/dcrt0.cc 26 Dec
On Feb 10 15:15, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Feb 10 21:47, jojelino wrote:
> > On 2011-02-10 19:02, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >
> > >Also, it would be nice if you would add more words to explain what your
> > >patch is doing. Just a patch with no explanation is not very inviting
> > >to take a l
On Feb 10 21:47, jojelino wrote:
> On 2011-02-10 19:02, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>
> >Also, it would be nice if you would add more words to explain what your
> >patch is doing. Just a patch with no explanation is not very inviting
> >to take a look at it at all.
>
> this patch deals with only "tw
On Feb 10 08:42, Charles Wilson wrote:
> On 2/10/2011 7:47 AM, jojelino wrote:
> > On 2011-02-10 19:02, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >
> >> Also, it would be nice if you would add more words to explain what your
> >> patch is doing. Just a patch with no explanation is not very inviting
> >> to take
On 2/10/2011 7:47 AM, jojelino wrote:
> On 2011-02-10 19:02, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>
>> Also, it would be nice if you would add more words to explain what your
>> patch is doing. Just a patch with no explanation is not very inviting
>> to take a look at it at all.
>
> this patch deals with onl
On 2011-02-10 19:02, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
Also, it would be nice if you would add more words to explain what your
patch is doing. Just a patch with no explanation is not very inviting
to take a look at it at all.
this patch deals with only "two" problem. and this is "first" one.
static ch
On Thu, 2011-02-10 at 10:54 +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Feb 10 01:04, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> > Please check in.
>
> - Please add the new entry point to doc/new-features.sgml.
Done and done.
Yaakov
On Feb 10 05:43, jojelino wrote:
> 2011-02-10
Did you read http://cygwin.com/contrib.html and the "Before you get
started" section? Did you already send a copyright assignment?
Also, it would be nice if you would add more words to explain what your
patch is doing. Just a patch with no expla
On Feb 10 10:50, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Feb 9 21:15, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 09, 2011 at 05:20:59PM -0700, Eric Blake wrote:
> > >+/* Newlib's provides declarations for two strerror_r
> > >+ variants, according to preprocessor feature macros. It does the
> > >+ right
On Feb 10 01:04, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 09, 2011 at 11:49:58PM -0600, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
> >pthread_yield(3) was part of the POSIX.1c drafts but never made it into
> >the final standard. Nevertheless, it is provided by Linux[1],
> >FreeBSD[2], OpenBSD[3], AIX[4], and possibl
On Feb 9 21:15, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 09, 2011 at 05:20:59PM -0700, Eric Blake wrote:
> >+/* Newlib's provides declarations for two strerror_r
> >+ variants, according to preprocessor feature macros. It does the
> >+ right thing for GNU strerror_r, but its __xpg_strerror_r
21 matches
Mail list logo
