On Oct 6 23:03, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 06, 2009 at 08:14:59PM -0400, Charles Wilson wrote:
> >I just figured it made sense to split up the ChangeLog, because I didn't
> >want to take credit for Kai's changes, but I did want to document what I
> >did, beyond the mingw/ version (whi
On Oct 6 14:24, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 06, 2009 at 11:08:53AM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >Hi,
> >
> >
> >I'd like to have your opinion for this patch before I check it in, since
> >I'm not sure this is the right way to fix it.
> >
> >When I debugged the luit/tcsh problem yes
On Oct 6 22:15, Christian Franke wrote:
> Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>> ...and maybe it's time to create a cygwin_internal call which replaces
>> cygwin_set_impersonation_token and deprecate cygwin_set_impersonation_token
>> in the long run. So, instead of the above we could have this call
>> taking
Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> Make the checkin and the ChangeLog one lump. The ChangeLog entry is
> about the work done to put this stuff into Cygwin, which was your work.
> Don't repeat the mingw entry, rather just say that you imported from
> there and credit Kai with that entry.
>
> Something like
On Wed, Oct 07, 2009 at 09:32:10AM -0400, Charles Wilson wrote:
>Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>> Make the checkin and the ChangeLog one lump. The ChangeLog entry is
>> about the work done to put this stuff into Cygwin, which was your work.
>> Don't repeat the mingw entry, rather just say that you impor
Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> OK. But now...do we need any additional discussion of the patch itself,
>> or did we cover that sufficiently on cygwin-developers?
>
> If you've, as you say "tested" this,
Yep, and no scare-quotes needed .
> I think we should get this in ASAP.
OK. Committed as pos
On Wed, Oct 07, 2009 at 11:49:49AM -0400, Charles Wilson wrote:
>Christopher Faylor wrote:
>
>>> OK. But now...do we need any additional discussion of the patch itself,
>>> or did we cover that sufficiently on cygwin-developers?
>>
>> If you've, as you say "tested" this,
>
>Yep, and no scare-quote
Charles Wilson wrote:
> It is already marked noreturn, in the declaration at the top of the
> file. I got an error when I marked the definition that way --
> apparently gcc4 doesn't like that:
>
> /usr/src/devel/kernel/src/winsup/cygwin/external.cc:181: error:
> attributes are not allowed on a f
Ping?
--
Chuck
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
According to Eric Blake on 10/7/2009 9:04 PM:
> I haven't spent time trying to locate where the leak is happening, but
> process explorer confirms that this STC leaves a handle open to the file,
> preventing further re-creation of a new file by the sam
10 matches
Mail list logo