[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Problem with sys_select on Cygwin

From: Eric Blake
Subject: Re: Problem with sys_select on Cygwin
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2016 16:47:37 -0600
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.6.0

On 03/21/2016 03:43 PM, Ken Brown wrote:
> On 3/21/2016 1:32 PM, Paul Eggert wrote:
>> Eric Blake wrote:
>>> This feels a bit too broad - it assumes that everyone is compiling with
>>> ONLY the latest newlib headers; remember, the cygwin header changes have
>>> NOT been released yet, but are in beta testing to see what else needs to
>>> change at the same time as the cygwin release.
>> As far as I know the current version should work OK with older Cygwin, 
>> as the affected #includes are needed only for non-Cygwin systems.
> I think that's right.

Okay, I can be convinced on that point.

> There's still the question raised by Corinna (on the Cygwin mailing list) as 
> to whether we should be testing for __NEWLIB__ rather than __CYGWIN__.  I'm 
> inclined to say yes, just for the sake of clarity, since the headers in 
> question come from newlib.  In other words, I would suggest the following, if 
> Eric agrees:

> @@ -102,10 +102,10 @@
>  /* Get definition of 'sigset_t'.
>     But avoid namespace pollution on glibc systems and "unknown type
> -   name" problems on Cygwin.
> +   name" problems on newlib systems..

No double '..'; and maybe the comment could say "newlib systems,
including Cygwin", since that is our most common newlib system.

Otherwise, I'm okay with the change.

Eric Blake   eblake redhat com    +1-919-301-3266
Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]