Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
X-Authentication-Warning:	cobold.vinschen.de: Host cobold.vinschen.de [192.168.129.2] claimed to be redhat.com
Message-ID:	<3A035626.BD9AA64B@redhat.com>
Date:	Sat, 04 Nov 2000 01:19:50 +0100
From:	Corinna Vinschen <vinschen AT redhat DOT com>
Reply-To:	cygwin <cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
X-Mailer:	Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16 i686)
X-Accept-Language:	de, en
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Subject:	Re: [PORTS] Re: ps and psql from PostgreSQL not working with
	cygwin-1.1.5-2
References:	<20001029205046 DOT A19137 AT redhat DOT com> <kvd7gh6ngu DOT fsf AT vzell DOT de DOT oracle DOT com> <20001031114831 DOT A27220 AT redhat DOT com> <20001102122634 DOT A211 AT dothill DOT com> <20001103160800 DOT A523 AT dothill DOT com> <20001103163716 DOT A19118 AT redhat DOT com> <20001103171504 DOT A238 AT dothill DOT com>

Jason Tishler wrote:
> 
> On Fri, Nov 03, 2000 at 04:37:16PM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> > I don't suppose that you can see any way to fix Cygwin to "do the right
> > thing" can you?
> 
> I'm under the impression that Cygwin is "doing the right thing."  If I'm
> misguided (yet again), then Cygwin should map WinSock WSAEWOULDBLOCK to
> EINPROGRESS as in my second patch which is re-attached to this email.
> This would behavior would at least match better with some man pages
> for connect.  I'm not that experienced with sockets, so I don't know
> what else this patch will break.

That's the problem. I thought about changing the behaviour of connect
two weeks ago. I'm not sure if it makes sense to change the error code
translation table for exactly that reason: Who knows what that would
break? Perhaps it's better to change only the connect call to return
EINPROGRESS. On the other hand Winsock seem to have interchanged the
meaning of WOULDBLOCK and INPROGRESS (by mistake?). Hmmm.

Corinna


-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Developer                        mailto:cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Red Hat, Inc.
mailto:vinschen AT redhat DOT com

--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com

- Raw text -