Mail Archives: cygwin/2000/02/07/18:17:38
Hi Chris,
you are are right, I said "I guess" and have not
actually seen any misbehavior. Indeed, I have a
single source file with a main() and no DLL of my
own at all. I'll test it as soon as I can find another
PC which I can unplug from network while running
without one of my collegues killing me...
Sorry for the false "alarm" 8-)
Bye, Heribert (heribert_dahms AT icon-gmbh DOT de)
> -----Original Message-----
> From: 'Chris Faylor' [SMTP:cgf AT cygnus DOT com]
> Sent: Saturday, February 05, 2000 00:26
> To: Heribert Dahms
> Cc: Fifer, Eric; 'Ray Easton'; cygwin AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
> Subject: Re: call_handler, interrupt_now and interruptible
>
> On Fri, Feb 04, 2000 at 10:45:14PM +0100, Heribert Dahms wrote:
> >I guess this breaks now my code, which basically does a select()
> until
> >a socket becomes readable, starts a loop preparing a timeout with
> >alarm(60) for the following blocking fgets(), which is normally reset
> >using alarm(0) after each line, but is supposed to be interrupted in
> >case of a bad behaving client?
>
> Why have you reached this conclusion? Have you actually
> noticed this behavior? The changes that I made should not
> have eliminated functionality in anything but DLLs and
> that is only temporary.
>
> If this is just supposition, then try the cygwin DLL. There
> is no need to speculate about things breaking if you haven't
> actually checked the code in question.
>
> cgf
--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
- Raw text -